Oral arguments ensued on Wednesday in Trump v. Barbara, a case that could redefine birthright citizenship in the United States.
The Trump administration specifically is attempting to end “birth tourism,” where illegal immigrants or citizens of foreign adversaries come to the U.S. while pregnant, give birth to an American citizen, and potentially use the child to gain legal advantages in the country.
One of the key arguments revolved around the definition of “allegiance” as applied to the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the 14th Amendment. A key argument of Solicitor General John Sauer was that being “subject to the jurisdiction” requires a meaningful and ongoing allegiance to the U.S., which it claims illegal immigrants and certain visitors do not fully owe because they entered unlawfully or only temporarily.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the court’s newest member appointed by President Biden, made her presence felt, drawing odd and often inapplicable comparisons and quoting figures she admitted she wasn’t familiar with.
DEI Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson made BY FAR the STUPIDEST argument against ending birthright citizenship
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) April 1, 2026
“If I steal a wallet in Japan, 1 am subject to Japanese laws..... in a sense, it's allegiance.”
This idiot HAS to be removed from the court.
pic.twitter.com/NGRDwZYQWE
"I was thinking about this, and I think there are various sources that say this, that you can have, you obviously have permanent allegiance based on being born in whatever country you're from," Justice Jackson said. "That's what everybody recognizes. But you also have local allegiance when you are on the soil of this other sovereign."
She went on to pose a hypothetical as a U.S. citizen in Japan.
"If I steal someone's wallet in Japan, the Japanese authorities can arrest me and prosecute me," she said. "It's allegiance meaning, can they control you as a matter of law? I can also rely on them if my wallet is stolen, to, you know, under Japanese law, go and prosecute the person who has stolen it. So there's this relationship based on, even though I'm a temporary traveler, I'm just on vacation in Japan, I'm still locally owing allegiance in that sense."
Her argument was criticized online for conflating simple territorial jurisdiction with citizenship law. Since jurisdiction does not require any allegiance, but citizenship is a permanent status with lasting effects, it demands a deeper, more ongoing bond of loyalty and membership in the political community that is not present in the temporary legal relationship involved in prosecuting a simple crime.
She even brought up sources she had little familiarity with.
🚨 OMG. DEI Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson starts quoting people on birthright citizenship, then says she doesn't even know WHO THEY ARE
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) April 1, 2026
Why is she quoting it then?!
"A subsequent debate, between Fessenden and Wade...I'm not sure whether these are senators, I apologize."
Yeah,… pic.twitter.com/GNKrP8HFJU
This comes as critics continue to dismiss Justice Jackson as little more than a DEI appointment, noting that President Biden pledged to nominate a Black woman to the Court with little emphasis on merit.
