The Trump administration’s campaign against immigrants reached the U.S. Supreme Court twice this month, as the administration also began urging immigrants to deport themselves.
On May 15, the high court heard oral arguments in a case related to birthright citizenship. Although this right is enshrined in the 14th Amendment, Trump has sought to overturn it by executive order.
When blocked by lower courts from violating the Constitution, Trump appealed to the Supreme Court. That case now involves two questions, with birthright citizenship taking a backseat to the question of whether lower courts may issue nationwide injunctions like those that so far have barred implementation of Trump’s order.
“Although several justices in recent years have expressed skepticism about so-called nationwide injunctions, which bar the government from enforcing a law or policy anywhere in the country, during more than two hours of oral arguments, it was not clear whether a majority of the justices were ready to bar such injunctions altogether,” SCOTUSblog reported.
The hearing largely avoided the issue of whether Trump’s attempt to end birthright citizenship is constitutional.
The hearing largely avoided the issue of whether Trump’s attempt to end birthright citizenship is constitutional, focusing mostly on administrative and procedural issues.
“In particular, some justices were dubious about whether a proposed alternative to universal injunctions, a class action, would actually be an improvement, while others seemed to suggest that these disputes would be especially inappropriate ones to reach the question because, in their view, Trump’s executive order is so clearly unconstitutional,” according to the blog.
As for the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of citizenship to all persons naturalized or born in the U.S.,” U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued Trump’s order “reflects the original meaning of the 14th Amendment, which guaranteed citizenship to the children of former slaves, not to illegal aliens or temporary visitors.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the president’s order violates previous Supreme Court rulings upholding the long-understood meaning of the amendment, including a case “that says, even if your parents came here and were stopped at the border, but you were born in our territory, you’re still a citizen. And we have another case that says, even if your parents secured citizenship illegally, you’re still a citizen.”
The justices are expected to issue a decision in the case in June or July.
As prisoners stand looking out from a cell, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem speaks during a tour of the Terrorist Confinement Center in Tecoluca, El Salvador, March 26, 2025. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
No protection for Venezuelans
Four days after this hearing, the Supreme Court issued a two-paragraph order allowing the Trump administration to terminate the protected status of about 350,000 Venezuelans living in the U.S.
The May 19 unsigned order pauses a lower court’s order blocking the move by Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and paves the way for the potential deportation of Venezuelans whose Temporary Protected Status was renewed by the Biden administration.
Attorneys representing plaintiffs in National TPS Alliance v. Noem said the order guts legal protections intended to curb presidential discretion and politicizes humanitarian relief.
“This is the largest single action stripping any group of non-citizens of immigration status in modern U.S. history.”
“This is the largest single action stripping any group of non-citizens of immigration status in modern U.S. history,” said Ahilan Arulanantham, co-director of the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law.
“With today’s decision, the Supreme Court effectively immunized Secretary Noem’s lawlessness,” said Emi MacLean, attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Northern California.
“The setback in the Supreme Court today will not deter us. The Trump administration will not stop us,” said Jose Palma, coordinator of National TPS Alliance. “On the contrary, we will never abandon our basic rights and we will never be frightened into silence.”
TPS is a federal program launched by Congress in the 1980s to provide temporary residency and work authorization to immigrants who face imminent danger or extreme hardship in their home countries.
The administration’s attempt to rescind the 18-month renewal for Venezuelans would have cleared the way for their deportations April 7 based on Noems’ claim the immigrants are criminals and gang members.
But Senior U.S. District Judge Edward Chen blocked the move pending the outcome of federal litigation, describing it as based on racial stereotypes, extreme harm to TPS beneficiaries and unlikely to withstand constitutional scrutiny.
The Trump administration faces a separate legal challenge by Venezuelan and Haitian immigrants whose TPS status also has been threatened by the Trump administration.
The high court’s order allowing the administration to end TPS for Venezuelans is unwarranted and cruel, said Anna Gallagher, CLINIC executive director.
“Venezuela remains highly unsafe, as our own State Department acknowledges in warning U.S. citizens not to travel there. We urge the administration to change course and create legal pathways to safety for Venezuelans who fled an oppressive regime and deteriorated economy. As a Catholic organization, we call for mercy and integrity in our systems, and for the prioritization of protecting human life and dignity.”
Self-deport flyers
Meanwhile, flyers urging immigrants to deport themselves continue to crop up in immigration courts and other settings across the country, immigration rights groups are reporting.
“We started hearing about these ‘self-deport’ posters in about April,” said Amelia Dagen, a staff attorney at Amica Center for Immigration Rights. “They are still being posted, and in some cases, they are being attached directly to scheduling orders and other court documents. We have even heard that some clients have had them mailed to their homes.”
The flyers titled “Message to Illegal Aliens: A Warning to Self-Deport” are being distributed by the U.S. Department of Justice, which oversees the nation’s immigration court system, according to the Immigration Policy Tracking Report.
Failing to self-deport could result in immediate deportation, fines, imprisonment and a lifetime ban on returning to the U.S., the flyer warns. But it also promises “self-deportation is safe,” enables immigrants to keep money earned in the U.S. and possibly return to the country in the future.
The flyers are misleading because there is no provision for self-deportation in U.S. law and the idea could be confused with the practice of “voluntary departure” which enables noncitizens to leave without the negative consequences associated with deportation, Dagen explained.
“This concept of just buy a plane ticket and leave is very confusing, especially for people who are already in proceedings” to remain in or leave the country. “And if they just buy a ticket and leave the country, it means they won’t show up for their next hearing and as a result will get an in absentia removal order barring you from ever coming back.”