The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled 6-3 that the Constitution guarantees automatic birthright citizenship to virtually everyone born in the United States, rejecting President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to end the longstanding constitutional guarantee.
Read more What it’s like to be a healthcare worker at the center of an Ebola outbreak
Before the decision was released, NPR’s Steve Inskeep spoke with Supreme Court expert Amy Howe, co-founder of SCOTUSblog, about what she was watching as the justices prepared to wrap up their term. Here are four takeaways from that conversation.
The birthright citizenship ruling was always likely to be complicated
Howe said she expected a lengthy, divided opinion. Even if the justices rejected Trump’s executive order, she anticipated separate opinions and dissents because of the significance of the case.
The justices are drawing new lines for independent federal agencies
Howe said the justices have generally been willing to give Trump broad authority over the executive branch. Inskeep pointed to two rulings issued the same day: one allowing the president greater power to remove officials from independent agencies, and another blocking his attempt to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook.
Howe said both conservative and liberal justices questioned whether those decisions were consistent. She said Chief Justice John Roberts largely treated the Federal Reserve as a unique institution.
Read more FDA scientists flag concerns with peptides, the trendy molecules RFK Jr. supports
“The chief justice was really sort of walking a tightrope,” Howe said. “His decision in the Lisa Cook case doesn’t even mention the Rebecca Slaughter case. In the Rebecca Slaughter case, all that he says is, ‘Well, the Fed may have a unique role,’ and that wouldn’t be covered by the rule that we’re establishing here.”
The court is expanding presidential power, but not without limits
Tuesday’s birthright citizenship decision fit Howe’s expectation that the court would reject one of Trump’s broadest assertions of executive power. But she said that outcome should be viewed alongside a broader trend of the justices granting the president greater authority over the executive branch.
“In the last couple of years, they have been willing to give this president really broad power,” Howe said.
The Federal Reserve may remain a special case
Howe said the court appeared intent on preserving the Federal Reserve’s independence. But its decision protecting Cook rested largely on procedural grounds because Cook was not given notice or an opportunity to respond before Trump ordered her removal from the board. That means the administration could still seek her removal if it followed the process outlined by the court.
Read more It’s going to be a hot July Fourth for much of the country