Supreme Court birthright citizenship decision renews conservative feud with GOP-appointed justices

Supreme Court Birthright Citizenship Ruling Prompts Reactions Among Conservatives on Republican-Appointed Justices

The Supreme Court’s decision addressing birthright citizenship has drawn attention to voting patterns among justices appointed by Republican presidents. The ruling occurred at the end of a term that produced varied outcomes for policies associated with the Trump administration. Some conservatives have expressed concerns about the direction of the court despite its 6-3 composition favoring appointees of Republican presidents.

Recent cases have prompted discussion about potential retirements of Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, who have aligned with certain administration positions more frequently than some other Republican appointees. Historical records show Republican-appointed justices casting decisive votes in cases involving abortion rights, the Affordable Care Act, eminent domain authority, and same-sex marriage. Justices appointed by Republican presidents including William Brennan, Harry Blackmun, John Paul Stevens, and David Souter joined majorities supporting outcomes favored by liberal advocates on multiple occasions. Justices such as Sandra Day O’Connor, Anthony Kennedy, and Chief Justice John Roberts have served as the fifth vote in several closely divided cases reaching similar results.

Republican presidents beginning with Ronald Reagan have stated goals of appointing justices who would interpret the Constitution in line with originalist or conservative principles. Candidates for the presidency from the Republican Party have routinely included pledges to select such nominees. Presidents Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon publicly noted differences between their expectations and the records of some of their appointees.

Byron White, appointed by President John F. Kennedy, is the only Democratic appointee to have regularly joined conservative majorities during his service. Antonin Scalia received unanimous Senate confirmation in 1986. William Rehnquist’s elevation to chief justice also received broad support. In 1987, the Senate rejected Robert Bork’s nomination after hearings led by then-Senator Joe Biden. Anthony Kennedy was confirmed the following year. David Souter, nominated by President George H.W. Bush, was approved by a wide margin, while Clarence Thomas’s confirmation required a narrower vote.

In 1992, the court decided Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Justice Kennedy wrote the opinion that reaffirmed the central holding of Roe v. Wade. Three decades later, the three justices appointed by President Trump joined the majority in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that overturned Roe. During the 2016 campaign, Trump stated intentions to appoint justices who would reconsider that precedent. Senate Republicans declined to hold hearings on Merrick Garland, President Obama’s nominee to fill the vacancy created by Scalia’s death in 2016. The seat remained open until Trump took office.

The Federalist Society played a role in identifying and vetting judicial candidates during the Trump administration. After the Dobbs decision, some conservative organizations and Republican lawmakers discussed additional steps, including a possible constitutional amendment addressing birthright citizenship. The court’s ruling in the birthright citizenship case has generated further commentary within conservative circles. Justice Amy Coney Barrett has received particular scrutiny in those discussions. Justice Neil Gorsuch, one of the Trump appointees, dissented in part from the majority opinion in that case.

Chief Justice Roberts has written or joined opinions that cite institutional considerations for the court. The term included both rulings supported by conservative advocates and others that did not align with their positions. Democratic leaders have described the court as aligned with the Trump administration and have proposed measures including expansion of the court’s size. Trump has criticized specific decisions, including one striking down certain tariffs.

The birthright citizenship litigation reached the court after lower-court challenges to executive-branch interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment’s citizenship clause. Oral arguments addressed questions of statutory and constitutional construction. The decision leaves in place existing practices regarding citizenship for children born in the United States to parents present unlawfully. Republican members of Congress have indicated plans to pursue legislative or constitutional responses.