Friday: The Birthright Bomb Is About to Drop — Are You Ready?

Rush LindellWhat nobody wants to say. The Supreme Court is about to hand down one of the biggest rulings of this decade, and most of the media is still asleep at the wheel.

ReaganAnd

Rush LindellWelcome to the Rush Lindell Show. I'm Rush Lindell.

ReaganI'm Reagan, and Rush, asleep at the wheel might be generous.

Rush LindellFair point. Today we are all over Trump versus Barbara, the birthright citizenship case that Newsweek is already comparing to

Speaker 3an ancient myth.

Rush LindellComparing to Dobbs in terms of sheer constitutional weight, SCOTUSblog flagged

ReaganYes.

Rush Lindellat least twelve opinions still outstanding before this term closes. This one is in that pile.

ReaganAnd the term ends soon, so the clock is actually ticking.

Rush LindellTicking loud, Trump signed Executive Order 1461 on his first day back, January twentieth twenty twenty five, and then showed up in. In person to watch oral arguments on April first, first sitting President ever to do that.

ReaganDuring April Fool's Day, for the record.

Rush LindellThe calendar does not lie. Now we're going wall to wall on this. Reagan walks us through the constitutional fight at the center, five words from the Fourteenth Amendment and what they actually mean.

ReaganSubject to the jurisdiction thereof. That's the whole ball game, and the competing interpretations go back to eighteen ninety eight.

Rush LindellThen we get into the court room itself, because Trump's own three appointees pushed hard against the government's position. That's the story most people are missing.

ReaganHmm. And there's a second story underneath all of this: a denaturalization apparatus running quietly alongside the Supreme Court case. That one deserves its own hour.

Rush LindellIt does. But we're covering it today. The 14th Amendment battle does not end with one ruling, and we're going to prove that. First segment starts right now. Before we dive in, a quick reminder. We love hearing from you. If you have questions or topics you'd like us to cover, head to the link in the description and submit your question. We read every single one. The Supreme Court has twelve opinions left to issue-twelve! The term ends within days, early July at latest, according to Newsweek.

ReaganAnd Newsweek called it the most consequential ruling since the court overturned abortion rights jurisprudence in 2022. That's the weight we're talking about.

Rush LindellThat's not nothing. You know what nobody wants to say? This one lands different because this isn't a policy debate dressed up. Stop is a legal question. It's a constitutional reckoning. January twentieth twenty twenty five, day one: Trump signs Executive Order fourteen one sixty protecting the meaning and value of American citizenship. Two categories of children gone.

Reaganhmm right children born here to mothers who are unlawfully present and children born to mothers on temporary visas both fathers not citizens or permanent residents That's the Executive Order according to the Library of Congress.

Rush LindellAnd then April first rolls around-April Fool's Day. Trump shows up in person to watch oral arguments-first sitting President in official records to ever do that.

ReaganA first.

Rush LindellA first. He stays for about ninety minutes, listens to his Solicitor General argue the case, then walks out, gets back to the White House and posts on Truth Social: And I'm going to quote this directly because it matters. He wrote: "We are the only country in the world stupid enough to allow birthright citizenship.

ReaganWhich is factually not accurate. Over thirty countries allow it.

Rush LindellRight! But the President wasn't at the court doing legal analysis-he was doing theater, and that's the honest read.

ReaganWhat I'd push back on slightly, the legal argument itself.

Speaker 4If health is separate from the theater, the executive order raises a real constitutional question about five words in the Fourteenth Amendment.

Rush LindellFive words, subject to the jurisdiction thereof-that's the whole fight; that's what twelve justices worth of scrutiny is about to land on.

Speaker 4And the clock is running." SCOTUSblog reported twelve opinions still outstanding as of yesterday-an opinion is expected before this term closes.

Rush LindellHowever this comes down, and we'll get into the legal architecture of that argument, the bigger story starts the day after. day after. So what exactly does that executive order say the 14th Amendment means?

Speaker 4That's where it gets complicated fast.

Rush LindellSo those five words-the whole constitutional fight lives in them. Walk me through the two sides.

Speaker 4The government's argument is that subject to the jurisdiction thereof means allegiance, not just physical presence; their read, the Fourteenth Amendment was written to give citizenship to freed slaves after Dred Scott, full stop. Children of people here illegally or temporarily, different situation entirely.

Rush LindellSo they're saying context matters. eighteen sixty eight, not twenty twenty six.

Speaker 4Right; and the Washington Times editorial out today makes that case bluntly: "Can any serious legal scholar argue the amendment's authors intended citizenship for anyone born on U.S. soil regardless of circumstance?

Rush LindellStrong words!

Speaker 4It's an opinion piece, but that's the originalist argument in plain English. Now, the other side points straight to Wong Kim Ark, eighteen ninety eight, Supreme Court,

Rush LindellMm

Speaker 4six

Rush Lindell-hmm.

Speaker 4to two. Two, born in San Francisco, parents were Chinese nationals, never eligible for citizenship. Court said it didn't matter. Born here? You're a citizen.

Rush LindellAnd that case is, what, 128 years old?

Speaker 4128 years. The challengers say Wong Kim Ark already answered this question. The government's trying to relitigate settled law.

Rush LindellSo the government's response is, what, that case doesn't apply? Doesn't apply!

Speaker 4They argue Wong Kim Ark only covered children of permanent residents—people with domicile here, not someone on a tourist visa, not someone who crossed the border illegally. That's the narrowing theory.

Rush LindellThat's doing a lot of heavy lifting on one word in a hundred and thirty year old opinion.

Speaker 4It is, and apparently Roberts agreed. According to last month at the Supreme Court,

Rush LindellYes.

Speaker 4the Solicitor General argued both

Speaker 3sides.

Speaker 4Argued the court needs to expand its reading to address a "new world": birth tourism, eight billion people.

Rush LindellOne plain right away. Roberts stopped him cold. Well, it's a new world; it's the same Constitution.

ReaganThat's the whole argument right there!

Rush LindellIt tells you exactly where Roberts was sitting when he heard that brief; so the Government's theory, allegiance over geography, runs straight into a hundred and twenty eight years of precedent and the Chief Justice cutting them off at the knees in open court.

ReaganThat's the set-up. The question is whether the rest of the bench agreed. And that's where the oral argument gets interesting, because the answer isn't as clean as Roberts made it sound. Yeah, Alito and Thomas were in a different zip code entirely. We'll get there. So now we know who lined up where, and, oh, man, this is the part I've been waiting for!

Rush LindellThe irony?

ReaganThe irony!

Rush LindellAlito and Thomas, the two justices most likely to hand Trump a win, according to last month at the Supreme Court, Alito went after the challengers. He argued illegal immigration was basically unknown when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in eighteen sixty eight. eight: Thomas Same Direction

ReaganThose two are probably the dissenters-the math gets brutal from there.

Rush LindellRight; because then you've got Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett, Trump's three picks, his people; and Gorsuch is in that argument telling the Solicitor General, quote, 'I'm not sure how much you want to rely on Wong Kim Ark.' That's not help; that's a warning shot.

ReaganGorsuch also pointed out that in eighteen sixty eight Anyone could show up in the U.S. and establish domicile. There were basically no immigration laws, so the government's domicile theory kind of collapses on its own historical evidence. He used their argument to argue against them: chef's kiss.

Rush LindellAnd Kavanaugh? He asked why bother ruling on the constitutional question at all when the court could just resolve it on statutory grounds, the Immigration and Nationality Act. Act.

ReaganWhich means even if Trump squeaks through on the Constitution, Kavanaugh might hand the other side a win anyway on a technicality.

Rush LindellThat's not a technicality; that's the court doing what courts do; but the practical result is the same.

ReaganAnd Newsweek is reporting Trump himself isn't optimistic. After oral arguments, he's not feeling great about his own case. The man sat in that courtroom and watched his appointees. Please probe the Solicitor General.

Rush LindellSCOTUSblog's transcript analysis puts the most likely outcome at six to three or seven to two against the government.

ReaganSo the president who reshaped the court may be reshaped by it. You cannot write this stuff.

Rush LindellLook, skeptical questions don't always predict votes, but the pressure was asymmetric: Gorsuch, Roberts, Jackson all concentrated fire on the government side.

ReaganAnd all of this drama, all of it, comes down to five words in one sentence written in eighteen sixty eight, which actually, well, someone should probably explain that in a way regular people can follow.

Rush LindellAre you proposing a seminar?

ReaganSomething like that. Stick around. All right, Welcome to the part of the show I am calling The Five Word Constitutional Crisis-Five Words Written in eighteen sixty eight, and lawyers have been billing by the hour ever since.

Rush LindellOne Hundred and Fifty Eight Years of Billable Hours

ReaganSubject to the jurisdiction thereof. That's it. That's the whole thing. That's what we're doing here, people.

Rush LindellRiveting

ReaganNow the Solicitor General John Sauer walks into the Supreme Court and drops this line: "Eight billion people are one plane ride away from having a child who's a U S citizen.

Rush LindellWow.

ReaganEight billion!

Rush LindellOkay, but by that logic-

ReaganApply it to the Second Amendment: "Eight billion people are one plane ride away from owning a firearm." Where's that panic?

Rush LindellOr the First Amendment: "Eight billion people one plane ride away from filing a strongly worded op ed.

ReaganTerrifying; and Roberts cool as ice goes, well, it's a new world. It's the same Constitution.

Rush LindellWhich is the whole ball game, honestly. That's Roberts telling you exactly where he lands.

ReaganMeanwhile, cable news has boiled this entire constitutional question down to "Trump wants to steal baby citizenship. Versus liberals want open borders. That's it. Pick a side.

Rush LindellNo mention of Wong Kim Ark, no mention of eighteen sixty eight ratification debates-just vibes.

ReaganJust pure distilled vibes-five words that broke the Internet-and almost nobody's actually reading them.

Rush LindellAnd while everyone's watching the court, there's a whole other story happening, one the media framing has completely buried.

ReaganThat's the story that should terrify people, and that's exactly where we're going. So while every one's been watching the Supreme Court case, the Administration's been running something else entirely-a parallel operation, already live.

Rush LindellThe American Immigration Lawyers Association documented it cleanly: three prongs: end birthright citizenship, make naturalization harder to get, and strip citizenship from people who already have it.

ReaganIn that order: Birth to Oath To revocation-the whole chain.

Rush LindellAnd the revocation piece, that's the one the cameras aren't on. USCIS field offices.

Speaker 4Wow.

Rush LindellThe New York Times got internal guidance showing the target 100 to 200 denaturalization referrals per month. Now, to be clear, there's a legitimate legal argument for going after fraud, people who lied on applications. That's existed forever. That's how we got Nazi war criminals.

ReaganNo argument from me: fraud is fraud.

Rush LindellBut here's where I push back on the quota model. Between 2017 and 2025, eight years, there were just over 120 cases total. Now they want 100 to 200 every single month.

ReaganThat's not enforcement, that's a production line.

Rush LindellAnd a former USCIS official told the Times that quotas change which cases get selected. Then you stop

Speaker 5asking "Is this case

Rush Lindellworth it?" and start asking "Can we close this fast?

ReaganWe all know what's really happening here; Supreme Court is the visible play, the cameras are there, the arguments are there, but this machine is already running regardless of how the ruling comes down.

Rush LindellAnd the

Speaker 3little

Rush LindellThe legal architecture makes it volume friendly. Denaturalization is civil, not criminal; no right to a court appointed attorney; no statute of limitations; the evidentiary bar is clear and convincing, not the criminal standard.

ReaganBuilt for Scale

Rush LindellThe AILA's framing is blunt; this is a coordinated strategy, not three separate enforcement decisions-one administration, three simultaneous prosecutions. The spontaneous pressure points on citizenship itself.

Speaker 4Win or lose at SCOTUS, the apparatus is already in motion. That's the story nobody's leading with tonight.

Rush LindellAnd that sets up a real question: What does the administration actually get depending on how the ruling goes? Win, lose, or split, none of those outcomes turns this off.

Speaker 4And the conservative reckoning over that-that's a conversation worth having. Stick around.

Speaker 5Mm-hmm.

Speaker 4So! two tracks-two very different outcomes. Let's run the tape on what actually happens in each.

Rush LindellIf Trump loses and the signals from that bench were not good for him, the denaturalization machine doesn't shut down. Congress is still moving. Senator Eric Schmitt's SCAM Act, the Stop Citizenship Abuse and Misrepresentation Act, would expand revocation grounds to cover fraud. odd-terrorist ties, aggravated felonies within ten years of naturalization.

Speaker 4And the USCIS quota apparatus is already running; a loss at Supreme Court doesn't unplug that.

Rush LindellRight; now, if Trump wins, even partially, Newsweek puts the affected population at around a hundred fifty thousand children born here per year under the current framework. Hospitals, agencies, state vital records offices? None of them are configured to make citizenship determinations at birth; that's an implementation problem nobody has a plan for.

Speaker 6Nobody has a plan. Shocking!

Rush LindellAnd this is where I want to push back on my own side for a second, Rush. There is a genuine conservative split here. Scholars like Ilan Wurman and Richard Epstein-serious legal minds-backed the administration's position. Wurman filed an amicus brief in Trump v. Barbara. ABRAHAM. Epstein literally wrote a book.

Speaker 6And they're not cranks: these are rigorous originalists making a real textual argument.

Rush LindellNo question; but-and this matters-the quota driven denaturalization apparatus is a separate problem. Using administrative volume to strip citizenship, civil standard, no appointed counsel-that is exactly the kind of unchecked federal power a limited government conservative should resist. Resist.

Speaker 6Two things going on at once-you can think birthright citizenship law needs fixing and still think that apparatus is dangerous.

Rush LindellPrecisely, and that's the honest split-the constitutional question and the enforcement machinery are not the same conversation.

Speaker 6You know what nobody wants to say; some of the loudest Conservatives cheering this on haven't read the SCAM Act; they're cheering the jersey, not the bill.

Rush LindellThat's fair, and that's the productive discomfort the ruling is going to force-whoever writes that opinion.

Speaker 4So watch two things when the ruling drops: first, who writes the majority opinion; Roberts writes it, you get a narrow textualist ruling; Thomas or Alito writes it, you get an originalist rewrite of the citizenship question itself. That is a very different opinion.

Rush LindellAnd the TPS case that just landed, the six three ruling in Mullin v Doe, is the context everyone's missing. The Court cleared the way to To end protections for three hundred and fifty thousand Haitians and sixty one hundred Syrians yesterday.

Speaker 6On the same week, that's the second front.

Rush LindellRight; and per CNN eight cases are still pending in this term, including birthright citizenship, so the ruling drops any morning could be Monday.

Speaker 6You know what nobody wants to say.

Rush LindellYeah.

Speaker 6Whatever the court does in Trump v. Barbara, the Fourteenth Amendment fight does not end at this ruling. Congress, the courts, the denaturalization pipeline. All of it keeps moving.

Rush LindellThat's the story the next week of coverage will completely miss.

Speaker 6And we already told you that's the difference between noise and signal.

Speaker 4Bottom line, the Supreme Court has twelve opinions left to issue-twelve-and Trump v. Dobbs is sitting at the top of that pile. This is the biggest citizenship ruling in a generation, and the clock is ticking.

Rush LindellWhat I keep coming back to is what we talked about earlier: five words, subject to the jurisdiction thereof. That phrase has carried 128 years of settled law since Wong Kim Ark.

Speaker 4Mm-hmm.

Speaker 6Mm-hmm.

Rush LindellThe court doesn't overturn that lightly.

Speaker 6And Trump left those oral arguments posting on Truth Social. That's the tell. When the theater starts that early, you know the legal confidence isn't exactly overflowing.

Rush LindellWatch who writes the opinion. That's your real signal.

Speaker 6That's exactly right. And remember, even if Trump loses, the SCAM Act and the Denaturalization Quota machine keep running. This fight doesn't end. It doesn't end with one ruling.

Rush LindellNot even close.

Speaker 6Thanks for riding this one out with us. If today's episode hit, subscribe, drop a five-star review and pass it to somebody who needs to hear it. New episodes every weekday.

Rush LindellSee you tomorrow, Rush.

Speaker 6We'll be here.