The Trump administration has made emergency appeals to the Supreme Court to push forward with plans to end birthright citizenship, a move that challenges long-standing legal interpretations. The administration argues that lower courts overstepped by issuing nationwide injunctions against the policy, seeking to limit their impact. Despite appeals, courts have rejected requests to halt rulings blocking the executive order. The Justice Department criticized the use of universal injunctions, stating they prevent the enforcement of executive orders nationwide without specificity. The 14th Amendment has historically been interpreted to grant citizenship to anyone born in the U.S., regardless of parental immigration status, with a precedent affirming this understanding. However, some conservatives challenge this interpretation, citing the amendment’s language regarding jurisdiction. This legal dispute highlights a divergence in views on birthright citizenship and the interpretation of constitutional principles. The unfolding nature of this story suggests ongoing developments and potential shifts in legal perspectives.