The five words fueling Trump's birthright citizenship fight

President Trump's executive order restricting birthright citizenship hinges on a Supreme Court dispute over five words in the 14th Amendment—"subject to the jurisdiction thereof"—with the administration arguing the phrase requires "lawful domicile" while the ACLU contends it applies to nearly all children born on U.S. soil except diplomats' offspring. Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the justices that political jurisdiction or allegiance determines citizenship, but Chief Justice John Roberts called his supporting examples "very quirky" and expressed skepticism shared across the ideological spectrum during Wednesday's oral arguments. If the Court sides with Trump, children of H-1B visa holders and those with temporary protected status would lose automatic citizenship, overturning more than a century of legal precedent. No lower court has yet ruled in the administration's favor on birthright citizenship cases, according to Todd Schulte of immigration advocacy group FWD.us, though the administration argues the order is necessary for national security in modern times. The Supreme Court's decision will determine whether the landmark 19th-century Wong Kim Ark precedent protecting birthright citizenship remains the law.