'Alarm bells' ring as Trump resurrects racist arguments in major legal case: experts

[LetMyPeopleVote]

The 14th Amendment is clear to me and the arguments being raised by trump are weak. The authority cited by trump's DOJ is really weak.

'Alarm bells' ring as Trump resurrects racist arguments in major legal case: experts

— Raw Story (@rawstory.com) 2026-03-30T14:30:15Z

https://www.rawstory.com/birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-2676636588

The Trump administration is relying on legal arguments developed by Confederate officers and 19th-century xenophobes to challenge birthright citizenship in a Supreme Court case expected to be decided by summer, drawing criticism from legal scholars who say the administration is recycling deeply racist historical precedents.

The administration's Supreme Court brief cites Alexander Porter Morse, a Confederate officer and Louisiana attorney who advocated for legalized segregation in the 1896 case that established the "separate but equal" doctrine that propped up Jim Crow laws, reported the Washington Post.

"The Trump administration has tapped Morse as an authority in its push to upend long-settled law that virtually everyone born in the United States is a citizen," the Post reported. "Over a century ago, Morse was among a trio of thinkers who spearheaded a failed effort — steeped in anti-Black and anti-Chinese racism — to erase birthright citizenship. The Trump administration is reviving their arguments to make its case today, some legal scholars say."

The administration also relies on arguments from Francis Wharton, a legal scholar who wrote that Chinese immigrants were insufficiently "civilized," and George D. Collins, a San Francisco attorney whose career ended in scandal.

Lucy Salyer, a University of New Hampshire history professor, expressed concern about the administration's approach. "If you know the history and the broader context of what they were trying to achieve, it does ring alarm bells," she said.

[Gaugamela]

1. Hmm. "Insufficiently civilized". . .

?

[MustLoveBeagles]

7. This

[FoxNewsSucks]

2. Krasnov just has to rely on his

19th-century confederate SCOTUS to back him up.

[LuvLoogie]

3. I shared this on my FB feed. This is my comment accompanying the post.

Alarm bells?

LOL. This was the core of what he ran on. It is his most popular policy among the MAGA. It's why most of them voted for him--six times. It's why he is still supported by 10s of millions of the real Americans calling themselves Christian Patriots. It is the engine that drives Manifest Destiny.

Alarm Bells?!

Y'all been hittin' snooze these last several centuries in the "Greater North America."

[spanone]

4. Born in the USA.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

[ChicagoTeamster]

5. Well even his past public statements on immigration, shithole countries, Peurto Ricans as immigrants, are racist

He knows Puerto Ricans are US citizens, he just dismisses them as not American out of racism. Same with the Obama birth certificate, the Central Park 5, and publicly saying that he wants more immigrants from Norway and Sweden. His white genocide in South Africa narrative for bringing white South Africans to the US was egregious but not surprising considering Trump took a lot of money from Musk and Thiel.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

6. Trump officials cite white supremacists in bid to end birthright citizenship

An argument heading to the Supreme Court is built in part on a post-Civil War campaign that scholars say was steeped in anti-Black and anti-Chinese racism.

Trump officials cite white supremacists in bid to end birthright citizenship

An argument heading to the Supreme Court is built in part on a post-Civil War campaign that scholars say was steeped in anti-Black and anti-Chinese racism.

www.washingtonpost.com/politics/202...

— Kathleen Bush-Joseph (@kathleenbush.bsky.social) 2026-03-30T11:34:12.673Z

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/03/30/trump-birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-case/

Alexander Porter Morse, a Confederate officer during the Civil War and a Louisiana attorney, argued for legalized segregation in the landmark 1896 Supreme Court case that established the “separate but equal” doctrine and buttressed Jim Crow laws.....

Trump administration attorneys cite Morse in their Supreme Court brief to argue the disputed idea that commentators in the 19th century widely agreed that the Constitution “exclude[s] the children of foreigners transiently within the United States” from qualifying for citizenship.

In addition to opposing birthright citizenship, Morse also advocated for limiting the other reconstruction amendments that abolished slavery and guaranteed Black people the right to vote.

The campaign against birthright citizenship also relied on rising anti-migrant feelings. The push backfired in 1898 when the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Wong Kim Ark that a man born to Chinese immigrants in San Francisco was a U.S. citizen, enshrining birthright citizenship as the law of the land.....

The justices ruled the 14th Amendment applied to Wong Kim Ark and virtually all people born in the United States. The precedent has stood for over a century and was infrequently challenged before Trump issued his executive order.....

CALDA also argues in a friend-of-the-court brief that the Trump administration “recycles” arguments by Morse, Wharton and Collins. It points out 19 instances in which the government’s brief cites the same treatises, cases, laws and legislative history as the Collins and government briefs in the Wong Kim Ark case.

trump is a racist and wants to deny citizenship to person born in the United States. trump has to cite theories from some racist assholes to support his argument. Hopefully the SCOTUS will reject this argument