Tom “T.M.” Wolf

Presidents can’t rescind birthright citizenship.

www.brennancenter.org/our-work/ana... @brennancenter.org

Riffing on this theme…

Or you could write: “That guarantee, which we wrote into the Constitution over 150 years ago so that politicians could no longer arbitrarily withhold it from disfavored classes of people, is grounded in the language of the 14th Amendment.”

We can win if we fight. Kudos to @aclu for leading the way on this!

Riffing on this theme…

Or you could write: “That guarantee, which we wrote into the Constitution over 150 years ago so that politicians could no longer arbitrarily withhold it from disfavored classes of people, is grounded in the language of the 14th Amendment.”

Birthright Citizenship Under the U.S. Constitution The 14th Amendment has long been understood to grant American citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil.

Breaking: The Supreme Court will hear whether the Trump administration's attempt to undermine birthright citizenship is unconstitutional. Here’s what to know about birthright citizenship, guaranteed by the 14th Amendment:

We can win if we fight. Kudos to @aclu for leading the way on this!

Historians Martha Jones and Kate Masur have filed a critical new brief in the birthright citizenship cases, showing how the story of free Black Americans' advocacy for birthright citizenship unravels the admin's lead justification for its EO.

Read it ⬇️ www.brennancenter.org/media/13981/...

Monday @ 10 AM: SCOTUS holds argument in Trump v. Slaughter. It’s a case about the president’s ability to remove Federal Trade Commissioners from office. It’s also a significant showdown over presidential power more broadly. A 🧵on issues to watch @brennancenter.org

An excellent thread, as always, from @tomtmwolf.bsky.social on what to watch for in Monday's Trump v. Slaughter oral argument:

Presidents can’t rescind birthright citizenship.

www.brennancenter.org/our-work/ana... @brennancenter.org

YouTube video by Brennan Center for Justice The Guarantee of Birthright Citizenship

SCOTUS will take up argument on Trump's (unconstitutional) order rescinding birthright citizenship. 3 top historians -- @katemasur.bsky.social @marthasjones.bsky.social and Erika Lee -- joined @brennancenter.org to talk about its historical and legal dimensions...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QCI...

Supreme Court to hear oral arguments on Rebecca Slaughter firing - Roll Call The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments Monday over President Donald Trump’s decision to fire Federal Trade Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter.

On Monday, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Trump v. Slaughter, a case about presidential removal authority over independent agencies. The case has broader implications for the scope of presidential power, @lmillerkaralunas.bsky.social tells @rollcall.com:

What will happen? We’ll see on Monday…

The case—and the long-running dispute about the president’s removal power—is really a proxy war over whether the Constitution grants the president the power to direct and remake the federal government at his will.

What about other people who work for agencies? What about collective bargaining agreements and federal labor law, which can put limits on hiring, firing, and working conditions? What about anti-discrimination law?

It’s hard to see how that power stops with the ability to fire agency heads, though, once you make it a constitutional command that overrides federal statutes Congress has passed.

The idea that the president needs to be able to fire agency heads at-will extends from a bigger idea that the president has to—as a constitutional matter—be able to direct all the activity of the federal agencies. (This is the concept that puts the “unitary” in “unitary executive theory.”)

This case is narrowly about the president’s ability to remove a Federal Trade Commissioner. But it could have implications for all the leadership structures of other independent agencies. And the ramifications could extend even further. Why?

5. Do the Justices suggest openness to limiting any ruling in Trump’s favor?

This rationale is, to be blunt but accurate about it, nonsense. How does the Court treat the “Fed exception” now? Do the Justices try to defend it? Explain it further?

4. A ruling that undermines the FTC's independence could do the same for the Federal Reserve. In an order earlier this year, SCOTUS said the Fed could stay independent because it is a “uniquely structured, quasi-private entity” with a “distinct historical tradition."

3. In a 1935 case called Humphrey’s Executor, the Court blessed the FTC’s independence. Trump is asking the Court not just to undo hundreds of years of congressional and presidential practice, but nearly 100 years of SCOTUS case law. How does the Court justify going against its own precedent?

2. Congress has been creating—and presidents have been signing-off on—independent agencies with removal protections since the late 19th century. Does the Court think Congress and presidents have been on a 150-year unconstitutional legislating spree? If it was alright then, why isn’t it alright now?

Annotated Guide to Historical Amicus Briefs in the Slaughter and Cook Removal Cases As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments in two cases challenging the removal of independent agency heads, several historians and legal scholars have filed friend-of-the-court briefs focused on...

Historians and legal scholars turned out in force to demonstrate the historical problems with Trump’s claim.

More on this from my colleague @lmillerkaralunas.bsky.social: www.brennancenter.org/our-work/res...

1. Trump claims that the Founders gave presidents unilateral power to remove the heads of independent agencies. The historical evidence doesn’t support that argument. How does the Court navigate this?

Monday @ 10 AM: SCOTUS holds argument in Trump v. Slaughter. It’s a case about the president’s ability to remove Federal Trade Commissioners from office. It’s also a significant showdown over presidential power more broadly. A 🧵on issues to watch @brennancenter.org

YouTube video by Brennan Center for Justice The President Can't End Birthright Citizenship

Here is a short video explaining why Trump cannot take away anyone's birthright citizenship order: www.youtube.com/shorts/CfeGI...

Birthright Citizenship Under the U.S. Constitution The 14th Amendment has long been understood to grant American citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil.

Here are some helpful @brennancenter.org resources to help you understand the case and what's at stake: (1) an explainer on birthright citizenship in the constitution, Trump's executive order, and the earlier SCOTUS action on this issue: www.brennancenter.org/our-work/res...

The Guarantee of Birthright Citizenship YouTube video by Brennan Center for Justice

"If you're born here, you're one of us. And of course, the president can't change a constitutional rule, which makes the order a shocking effective overreach." - Tom Wolf, Director of Democracy Initiatives. Watch: www.youtube.com/live/6QCIt0l...

The Guarantee of Birthright Citizenship YouTube video by Brennan Center for Justice

"The surest way to protect our constitution is to act like we still have one. The surest way to lose it is to act like we don't." - Tom Wolf, Director of Democracy Initiatives. Watch: www.youtube.com/live/6QCIt0l...