On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara—the case that will determine whether Trump’s executive order stripping birthright citizenship from children born on U.S. soil can stand. A majority of the justices, including several Trump appointees, signaled deep skepticism of the administration’s core contention that the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause has been misread for over a century. The constitutional guarantee at stake is one of the most fundamental in American life, and the legal fight to dismantle it has been years in the making.
The night after the arguments, The UnPopulist Senior Editor Andy Craig welcomed Northwestern Law Professor Paul Gowder to the inaugural edition of The UnPopulist Live. Andy and Paul had an hour-long conversation that went well beyond the courtroom. The two traced the history of the 14th Amendment, dissected John Eastman’s arguments for reinterpreting the citizenship clause, and assessed what the oral arguments revealed about where the court is likely to land.
Here is Paul’s piece from earlier this week that gets into a lot of that:
Every Argument Against Birthright Citizenship Is Hollow
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara—the case that will finally decide whether Donald Trump’s executive order stripping birthright citizenship from U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants is constitutional. Every court to consider the question has said it is…
And for those who missed the live stream, we’ve got you covered in this post. We present to you the full conversation between Andy Craig and Paul Gowder on birthright citizenship. Give it a watch.
© The UnPopulist, 2026
Follow us on Bluesky, Threads, YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and X.
