Five days after oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara, the Supreme Court's direction is clear enough that SCOTUSblog wrote plainly: the court "appears likely to side against Trump on birthright citizenship." [1] The justices heard arguments April 1 on whether Trump's executive order restricting citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants and those on temporary visas is constitutional under the 14th Amendment.

The hearing was notable for Trump's personal attendance — the first sitting president to observe oral arguments — and for the reception his solicitor general received. Justices appointed by Trump, including those he placed on the court as part of a stated plan to reshape its jurisprudence, pressed John Sauer on the plain text of the amendment: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens." [2] The government's argument that the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" excludes children of undocumented immigrants found little purchase. [3]

Education Week described the court as "poised to reject" the restrictions. [4] Politico reported the justices "appeared skeptical" and that Trump's attendance "didn't seem to help." [3] A ruling is expected by late June. The 14th Amendment has survived constitutional challenges since 1868. The June decision will say whether it can survive an executive order.

-- MAYA CALLOWAY, New York