President Donald Trump took his contentious bid to end birthright citizenship in the United States to the Supreme Court on Thursday.

Trump’s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship, which he signed on his first day in office, was blocked by federal district courts in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington state.

Birthright citizenship is enshrined in the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, which decrees that anyone born on American soil is a citizen, and Trump’s order seeks to end it for children whose parents are in the country illegally.

In an emergency application with the Supreme Court, the Justice Department sought to narrow the scope of the nationwide lower court injunctions to the individual plaintiffs in the three cases.

The department’s acting solicitor general Sarah Harris described it as a “modest” request and she notably did not seek a ruling from the Supreme Court at this time as to whether eliminating birthright citizenship is constitutional or not.

“Those universal injunctions prohibit a Day 1 Executive Order from being enforced anywhere in the country,” Harris wrote.

“While the parties litigate weighty merits questions, the Court should ‘restrict the scope’ of multiple preliminary injunctions that ‘purport to cover every person in the country,’ limiting those injunctions to parties actually within the courts’ power,” she said.

Trump has been facing legal pushback in courts across the country as he attempts to stem illegal immigration, slash the government budget and reduce the federal workforce.

In his latest setback, a district judge in California on Thursday ordered six federal agencies to rehire thousands of probationary workers who had been fired.

‘Epidemic proportions’

Harris, in her brief with the Supreme Court, also took issue with the number of injunctions on Trump administration moves being issued by district court judges.

“Universal injunctions have reached epidemic proportions,” she said, and are preventing “the Executive Branch from performing its constitutional functions.”

Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship was due to come into effect by February 19.

The 14th Amendment says, in part: “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.”

Trump’s order was premised on the idea that anyone in the United States illegally, or on a visa, was not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the country, and therefore excluded from this category.

Judge John Coughenour, who heard the birthright case in Washington state, described the president’s executive order as “blatantly unconstitutional.”

“I’ve been on the bench for over four decades, I can’t remember another case where the question presented is as clear as this one is,” said Coughenour, who was appointed by a Republican president, Ronald Reagan.

The conservative-dominated Supreme Court, which includes three justices nominated by Trump, is primed to play a significant role as the president tests the limits of his executive power and the judiciary pushes back.

AFP

The Nigerian Senate has defended its decision to suspend Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan before the Inter-Parliamentary Union, stating that her suspension was not related to allegations of sexual harassment but due to gross misconduct.

Speaking before the IPU on Wednesday, the Chairperson of the House Committee on Women Affairs and Social Development, Kafilat Ogbara, dismissed claims made by Akpoti-Uduaghan at a United Nations event that she was suspended for raising allegations of sexual harassment against Senate President Godswill Akpabio.

Ogbara said she has been mandated by the National Assembly to present a response to Akpoti-Uduaghan’s speech delivered at the 69th session of the United Nations Commission on the status of women.

“In response to the call by the President of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, Right Honorable Tulia Ackson to hear both sides of the matter, I have received a letter from the Nigerian Senate in my capacity as Chairman of the House Committee on Women Affairs and Social Development of our parliament in Nigeria and the parliamentarian representing Nigeria at this conference,” she stated.

She said, “Such allegations demand a thorough, impartial and transparent investigation. At the same time, we must ensure that fairness is upheld for all individuals involved and that justice is neither predetermined nor one-sided.

“Nigeria remains firmly committed to upholding women’s rights and combating gender-based violence through strong legal frameworks and institutions. Our Parliament and Judiciary continue to undergo reforms to strengthen these efforts.

“The ongoing legislative initiatives seek to address historical imbalances in women’s representation in our Parliament, including the Reserve Seats Bill and other crucial proposed constitutional amendments aimed at safeguarding the rights and privileges of women. These efforts underscore our commitment to fostering a more inclusive and equitable political space.”

Addressing the allegations against Akpabio, Ogbara said, “It is important to recognise that both the allegations made and the responses provided are serious matters that require careful and unbiased scrutiny.

This issue, which remains subjudice, involves multiple elements, including allegations of sexual harassment and potential violations of Senate rules. While it is necessary to engage in introspection and understand any potential connections, these matters must also be considered separately.

“It is imperative that we uphold the principles of fairness and ensure that no individual is prematurely judged without a transparent and impartial process. Therefore, I call for the following actions: A thorough and unbiased investigation, ensuring that all claims and defences are examined fairly and transparently.

“Protection of all parties involved, safeguarding the rights of all individuals, and preventing any form of intimidation or retaliation, accountability and transparency and upholding institutional integrity by ensuring that due process is rigorously followed.”

She then read the position paper of the Senate by the Senate Leader, Senator Opeyemi Bamidele.

The Senate letter read in part, “Senator Natasha-Akpoti-Uduaghan was suspended for gross misconduct and unruly behaviour and not as a result of allegation of sexual harassment or assault.

“The authority of the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria firmly refutes the deliberate misinformation and false narrative being circulated by certain media organisations regarding the six-month suspension of Senator Natsaha-Akpoti-Uduaghan.

“Let it be unequivocally stated that Senator Uduaghan was suspended solely for her persistent act of misconduct and disregard for the Senate Standing Orders.”

According to the Senate, Akpoti-Uduaghan was found guilty of violating Sections 6.1 and 6.2 of the Senate rules, which led to her suspension.

“If Akpoti-Uduaghan had strictly followed its guiding principles, the Senate would have treated her petition based on merit in line with its practice, noting that she never obeyed the established practices of the institution where she was serving,” Bamidele said.

The statement further explained, “Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension was a decision of the Committee of the Whole Senate, following the submission of a report by the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics and Privileges.”

The Senate accused her of “refusing to sit in her assigned seat during plenary on February 25, 2025, despite multiple pleas from the leadership and other ranking senators,” engaging in “unruly and disruptive behaviour,” and making “abusive and disrespectful remarks against the leadership of the Senate.”

She was also accused of “defying and refusing to comply with the summons of the Senate Committee on Ethics and Privileges mandated to investigate cases of misconduct.”

The Senate maintained that her suspension was necessary to restore order and uphold the integrity of the legislative body.

“No senator, regardless of status, gender, or political affiliation, is above the rules of the Senate.

“Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension was a direct consequence of her actions and nothing else,” the statement added.

The Senate called on media organisations to “correct the misrepresentations” and refrain from spreading “falsehoods that undermine the integrity of Nigeria’s legislative process.”

Akpoti-Uduaghan escalated her dispute with Akpabio on Tuesday by presenting her case at a United Nations forum.

The senator representing Kogi Central called for international intervention to hold the Nigerian Senate accountable.

President Bola Tinubu on Thursday received his South African counterpart Cyril Ramaphosa as both leaders held a bilateral talks following the latter’s swearing-in ceremony.

The meeting was hosted by the Nigerian president in Johannesburg, South Africa.

In a statement after the meeting, Tinubu’s spokesman Ajuri Ngelale quoted his principal as saying, “I really enjoyed your speech at the ceremony. I was delighted listening to you. We have lots of issues in common, and we need to work more closely together. It was a good celebration”.

The South African president also thanked Tinubu for attending the inauguration.

“Thank you so much for coming for the inauguration. I was very happy to see my brother at the ceremony,” he said.

Ramaphosa was sworn in on Wednesday after a coalition agreement between the African National Congress (ANC) and other parties.

Tinubu was among African leaders who attended Ramaphosa’s swearing-in. A video of the South African president purportedly snubbing Tinubu at the event had gone viral.

But the Nigerian presidency in the wake of the development, said the video was taken out of context.

The Senior Special Assistant to Tinubu on Digital Communications, Strategy, and New Media O’tega Ogra on his X handle said, “For the record: 1. That first row at today’s inauguration was reserved for South African kings/royalty. 2. The South African President wasn’t expected to start greeting dignitaries at the time of the video you shared and he was respectfully recalled to the podium by the inauguration compere (see video below). 3. Immediately after President Ramaphosa finished the anthem, he went ahead to greet the visiting presidents who were all seated in the second row (similar to the way visiting presidents were seated in the third row during Nigeria’s own inauguration on May 29, 2023…).”