The president made history by attending oral arguments, but observers say his presence did little to sway a skeptical bench.
President Trump made an extraordinary appearance at the Supreme Court on Thursday as the justices heard oral arguments in a case challenging his executive order seeking to restrict birthright citizenship a move widely seen as an attempt to exert influence over the nation’s highest court. By most accounts, it did not go as planned.
Trump became the first sitting president to attend Supreme Court oral arguments, arriving to a packed courtroom where justices subjected his administration’s legal position to pointed and, at times, skeptical questioning. He departed at 11:25 a.m., before arguments had concluded, leaving without the show of judicial deference he may have anticipated.
Sherrilyn Ifill, President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, was present in the courtroom and offered a candid assessment of the proceedings. “It was actually a good lesson for him,” she said in remarks to reporters afterward. “There are just places in which he’s very small, and the Supreme Court and the gallery and the arguments in the Supreme Court they have their own choreography.”
The case centers on Mr. Trump’s executive order seeking to deny automatic citizenship to children born in the United States to undocumented immigrants, a right enshrined in the Fourteenth Amendment and upheld by more than a century of legal precedent. More than 200,000 such children are born in the country each year. Legal experts across the ideological spectrum have questioned the constitutional basis for the order.
During arguments, Chief Justice John Roberts signaled unease with the government’s position. Addressing Solicitor General D. John Sauer, Roberts acknowledged that while “it’s a new world,” he was quick to add, “it’s the same Constitution” a remark that drew notice among those in attendance.
Ifill reserved particular praise for Cecilia Wang of the American Civil Liberties Union, who argued on behalf of the plaintiffs. “I’ve rarely heard a better argument in the United States Supreme Court,” said Ifill, citing Wang’s “responsiveness, her clarity, her poise, her attention to detail, her knowledge of the subject matter.” She described the overall presentation as “masterful” and expressed confidence in the outcome, while urging caution. “With this Supreme Court, it’s always hard to tell,” she said, “and so I think we have to remain vigilant.”
As for the president’s presence, Ifill was unequivocal: it changed nothing. “To be honest, not at all in terms of the vibe of the courtroom,” she said when asked whether Trump’s attendance had shifted the atmosphere. “They run a very tight ship in terms of security and so forth. So there were no shenanigans. It didn’t change the environment at all.”
Trump sat quietly in the rear of the courtroom alongside Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick during the portion of the argument he attended. The subdued posture stood in contrast to the combative public persona the president typically projects, a distinction Ifill noted with measured directness.
The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling in the case by July. A decision striking down the executive order would represent a significant legal defeat for the administration and a reaffirmation of one of the Constitution’s most foundational citizenship protections. A ruling in the government’s favor would mark one of the most consequential shifts in American constitutional law in generations.
For now, advocates on both sides are watching and waiting. “They left it all on the floor,” Ifill said of the legal team that argued against the administration. “And I was feeling very proud in there today.”
