Summary of Tangle Podcast Episode: "The Supreme Court takes up birthright citizenship, sort of."

Introduction

In this episode of Tangle, host Isaac Saul navigates the complex terrain of birthright citizenship as it stands before the Supreme Court. The discussion uncovers not only the nuances of the legal battle but also the broader implications of nationwide injunctions on executive power and judicial authority.

Personal Milestone

Isaac begins the episode by sharing a heartfelt personal update. He congratulates his wife, Phoebe Saul, on her law school graduation, highlighting her perseverance through significant personal challenges, including completing her studies while pregnant and after childbirth (02:07). This segment sets a personal and motivational tone before delving into the episode's main political discourse.

Main Discussion: Birthright Citizenship and Nationwide Injunctions

Legal Background

The episode centers on a pivotal Supreme Court case challenging a Trump-era executive order aimed at revoking automatic citizenship for children born in the United States to parents without legal status. Isaac explains:

"On his first day back in office, President Trump signed an executive order ending the automatic extension of citizenship for children born in the United States to parents who were not in the country legally..." (06:32)

This order was swiftly halted by a U.S. district judge who deemed it "blatantly unconstitutional," leading to nationwide injunctions that blocked its enforcement across all states.

Supreme Court's Focus

Contrary to initial perceptions, the Supreme Court's deliberations are not solely about birthright citizenship. Instead, they are primarily focused on the authority of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions. Isaac notes:

"The arguments primarily focused on the constitutionality of federal judges issuing universal injunctions..." (06:28)

Perspectives from the Left

John Lowell outlines the liberal stance, acknowledging imperfections in the use of nationwide injunctions but asserting their necessity in this context. Ruth Marcus from The New Yorker emphasizes the national implications of citizenship:

"...Citizenship is by definition a national issue. It makes little sense to have a patchwork nation..." (12:13)

Amanda Frost of The Atlantic highlights a critical moment during oral arguments where Solicitor General John D. Sauer struggled to provide a clear implementation plan for the executive order, illustrating the administration's strategic avoidance of confronting the order's merits directly:

"We don't know, Sauer candidly told the court." (12:13)

Erwin Chemerinsky from the Los Angeles Times raises concerns about the fragmentation of citizenship laws and the broader implications of limiting nationwide injunctions:

"The president's primary argument is that nationwide injunctions prevent the executive branch from carrying out its constitutional duties." (12:13)

Perspectives from the Right

Conversely, the conservative viewpoint, as presented by National Review, advocates for curbing the use of nationwide injunctions, viewing them as judicial overreach:

"It's time to rein in nationwide injunctions..." (12:13)

Margo Cleveland of The Federalist argues that even a Supreme Court victory for Trump on birthright citizenship would not deter the continued issuance of nationwide injunctions, especially those stemming from the Administrative Procedure Act (APA):

"...the issue before the Supreme Court is narrow and does not concern the propriety of nationwide injunctions in cases brought under the Administrative Procedure Act." (12:13)

Jason Willock from The Washington Post discusses the shifting power dynamics, warning that restricting nationwide injunctions could concentrate excessive judicial power within the Supreme Court:

"By reserving for themselves the authority to block presidential policies, the justices will be consolidating more of the Constitution's judicial power..." (12:13)

Expert Insights

An exclusive preview of an upcoming interview with Sarah Isger from The Dispatch reveals the complexities faced by the Justices. She anticipates that the Court may establish a new framework to govern the issuance of nationwide injunctions:

"They're gonna split the baby a little bit. They're gonna trim in what circumstances you can issue a nationwide injunction." (23:16)

Isaac Saul's Analysis

Isaac provides his critical perspective, asserting that the Trump administration is strategically avoiding a substantive legal battle over the merits of ending birthright citizenship, knowing it is likely to lose that fight. He emphasizes:

"The Trump administration knows it will lose the birthright citizenship case on the merits, so it is avoiding that fight altogether." (27:49)

Isaac further explores the potential dangers of limiting nationwide injunctions, warning that it could pave the way for authoritarian executive actions. He underscores the delicate balance required to prevent judicial overreach while maintaining necessary checks on executive power.

Listener Q&A: Trusting Information in the AI Era

Addressing a listener’s concern about the reliability of online information amidst advancements in AI, Isaac advises vigilance and skepticism:

"As long as you're remaining healthily skeptical, you can definitely trust most of what the sources you can validate and vouch for are saying." (36:13)

He encourages listeners to verify sources and maintain a critical approach to consuming online content.

Under the Radar Story: SSA Anti-Fraud Checks

John Lowell brings attention to internal Social Security Administration (SSA) documents revealing that new anti-fraud checks have identified only two potentially fraudulent claims out of approximately 110,000. However, these checks have resulted in a 25% slowdown in retirement claim processing, leading to over 140,000 unprocessed claims:

"The agency has fielded approximately 110,000 such claims... but the checks have slowed retirement claim processing by 25%." (36:13)

This exposes inefficiencies within government processes and challenges prevailing narratives about rampant fraud.

Numbers and Statistics

• Public Opinion on Birthright Citizenship:

  • Americans: 28% support ending birthright citizenship, 53% oppose.
  • Democrats: 11% support, 79% oppose.
  • Republicans: 48% support, 34% oppose. (NPR Ipsos poll, May 2025)

• Impact of Executive Order:

  • Approximately 255,000 babies born annually in the U.S. would be denied citizenship under the executive order. (Migration Policy Institute, May 2025)

• Nationwide Injunctions by Administration:

  • George W. Bush: 6
  • Barack Obama: 12
  • Donald Trump: 64
  • Joe Biden: 14 (through 2023)

• Bee Colony Collapse:

  • A new nutrient-packed food source resembling dry pet food shows promise in sustaining nutritionally stressed bee colonies. (Washington State University)

Conclusion

The Tangle episode offers a thorough exploration of the Supreme Court's involvement in the birthright citizenship debate, highlighting the intricate interplay between legal strategies and political maneuvering. As the Court deliberates on the authority of nationwide injunctions, the outcome holds profound implications for the balance of power between the judiciary and the executive branch, as well as for the future of citizenship laws in the United States.

Timestamp references are approximations based on the transcript provided.