- Professor John Eastman, Chapman Law
All eyes are on the United States Supreme Court as it prepares to hear oral argument in U.S. v. Texas, which will examine the President's executive actions on immigration. In addition to complex questions about standing and administrative law, the Court has, on its own initiative, added a Take Care Clause question to the argument. Our experts previewed the oral arguments, the major points to be made by both sides, and the stakes.
Since before the Revolution, American legal and political traditions have supported many forms of multiculturalism, through institutions such as freedom of association, religious liberty, parental rights, freedom of speech, private property, federalism, often open immigration policy, and the like. And those traditions have likewise imposed constraints on such multiculturalism. What can those traditions tell us about today’s multiculturalism debates?
This panel took place during the 18th Annual Faculty Conference at the Sheraton New York Times Square Hotel in New York, NY on January 9, 2016.
Panel: American Multiculturalism: Its Force and Limits From 1776 to Today
9:00 am - 10:45 am
Sheraton New York Times Square Hotel
New York, NY
The Supreme Court will soon decide whether to hear a challenge by Texas (and 25 other states) to President Obama’s deferred action immigration policy. The federal government, which lost below, is asking the Court to reverse both because it believes the policy is lawful and because it believes the states weren’t entitled to bring the suit in the first place—because they lacked “standing.” This Teleforum debate considered both who has the better of the standing argument in the Texas case, and, more generally, when states should (and should not be) allowed to challenge federal government policies in court.
The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." Does this clause make all persons born in the United States citizens of the United States?