Trump-Appointed Justice Turns On Admin to Grill Top Official on Ending Birthright Citizenship

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett challenged the Trump administration's top lawyer Thursday during a hearing over the legality of nationwide injunctions — and the president's controversial attempt to end birthright citizenship.

Barrett, appointed by President Donald Trump in 2020, broke with MAGA expectations by siding with Justice Elena Kagan when she stepped in to an exchange with Solicitor General Dean John Sauer, who is representing the administration in its push to limit the power of federal judges to block executive orders.

"Are you really going to answer Justice Kagan by saying there is no way to do this expeditiously?" Barrett asked, going on to accuse Sauer of "resisting" Kagan with a dismissive response about the viability of class-action lawsuits.

The exchange occurred during oral arguments on whether federal district judges should be able to issue nationwide injunctions. Multiple injunctions have been issued against the Trump administration — in this case, the injunctions have blocked Trump's executive order revoking birthright citizenship.

While the legality of ending birthright citizenship was not directly under consideration, Kagan made her position on the matter clear as she sought to protect the legal safeguards that block unconstitutional executive orders.

"How else are we going to get to the right result here, which is on my assumption that the EO is illegal?" she asked.

Sauer replied that such a result would be "profoundly wrong," prompting further questioning from Barrett, who pushed him to admit that a class-action suit could offer a faster path for widespread judicial relief — something the administration has tried to avoid.

Barrett's pointed remarks come amid growing MAGA discontent with her rulings. Earlier this year, she voted with the court's liberal justices to uphold nearly $2 billion in foreign aid, drawing backlash from right-wing influencers who expected her rulings to align with the president who appointed her.

Critics of the administration argue that eliminating nationwide injunctions would force each person affected by Trump's order — including families of U.S.-born children at risk of being denied citizenship — to fight individual legal battles.

The court's ultimate decision on injunctions could determine whether Trump's executive order takes effect before its constitutionality is formally decided — with massive consequences for immigration policy and civil rights.