C-SPAN asks the Supreme Court to televise arguments for Trump's birthright citizenship case

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: Politico

05/07/2025 01:25 PM EDT
Updated: 05/07/2025 02:20 PM EDT


C-SPAN asked the Supreme Court to broadcast upcoming oral arguments on the federal government’s challenge to rulings blocking President Donald Trump’s executive order challenging birthright citizenship. The Supreme Court has a long-standing rule against allowing cameras in the courtroom. But during the 2020 pandemic, the court provided a live audio stream of arguments — a practice the high court continued even once in-person arguments resumed.

“This case holds profound national significance,” read a letter from Sam Feist, the network’s chief executive officer, that was posted by the broadcaster Wednesday. “Its implications — legal, political, and personal — will affect millions of Americans. In light of this, we believe the public interest is best served through live television coverage of the proceedings.”

The Supreme Court will hold a special oral argument May 15 for three cases challenging the Trump administration’s executive order to end birthright citizenship for some children born in the U.S. The rare move by the high court comes after the Trump administration filed emergency appeals asking the justices to narrow or lift nationwide injunctions brought on separately by three federal judges who said Trump’s order — which was signed on the first day of his second term — brazenly violates the 14th Amendment.

The justices aren’t expected to rule definitively on the order’s constitutionality, though. Instead, they’ll consider whether to limit the scope of judges’ abilities to issue nationwide injunctions. A ruling could dramatically impact how Trump’s policies are applied across the country and limit opponents’ options to seek broad relief.

Read more: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/05/07/supreme-court-cameras-cspan-00333293

[Jacson6]

1. They already provide the audio for their hearings

It's not like Roberts is going to get up and dance for the camera. Besides court hearings are boring to the average person.

[BumRushDaShow]

4. The "average person" is not even paying attention to "the news"

and is more worried about what is happening with Travis Kelce and Taylor Swift.

This is why so many of them go along with the MAGat bullshit that pretty much eliminates the judiciary as "a co-equal branch of government".

Broadcasting a video would be for those who follow politics, including the politicos, reporters/journalists, lawyers, and those in education who teach history and/or are students, as well as those who follow it as a hobby.

[Evolve Dammit]

6. Absolutely right. It's galling that most don't care one wit about the truth and what is happening.

[Blasphemer]

2. Good idea. More Americans should be engaged and TV helps. nt

[slightlv]

3. This case is going to be epic, in that it's about so much

more than the 14th Amendment. This could be the opening for the Republican push to convene a constitutional convention, and change the Constitution to the way they want it... more like the old Articles of Confederation. At the least, it could pave the way for trump to consistently break his oath of office by passing more of what should plainly be "unconstitutional" mandates. This one has me more than a bit antsy.

[24601]

5. This is likely the most significant case of the term - perhaps the most important in this decade. Most of the coverage

has ignored the last portion, Section 5: "The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."

If Congress defines the limits of birthright citizenship with legislation, the USSC likely would affirm it.

Consider that Congress could pass words to the effect of:

"For the purposes of this Amendment, "Under that jurisdiction thereof, means that a person born within the territorial limits of the United States shall have at least one parent who is either a Citizen or a Lawful Permanent Resident of the United States."

[dchill]

7. 👏👏👏

[SunSeeker]

8. It is fucking ridiculous--and scary--that they even took up this case. Birthright citizenship is well settled law.

And there are no conflicting interpretations among the circuit courts as far as I know.