Raskin applauds birthright citizenship decision, calls other SCOTUS rulings ‘profoundly objectionable’

Congressman also says reforms needed to address ‘legitimacy crisis’ on nation’s highest court

July 3, 2026 5:35 p.m.

U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Dist. 8) of Takoma Park on Thursday celebrated the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision to affirm birthright citizenship while calling other recent opinions “profoundly objectionable.”

The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee also said reforms — such as stricter ethics rules and limits on the use of the so-called “shadow docket” — are needed to address the “legitimacy crisis” on the nation’s highest court.

Raskin’s appearance on County Executive Marc Elrich’s (D) weekly media briefing comes one day after the Supreme Court wrapped up its most recent term.

Its final ruling was a rejection of President Donald Trump’s effort to deny American citizenship to children born to people who are in the U.S. illegally or temporarily.

- Advertisement -

The majority in that case found the executive order to be in violation of the 14th amendment, which defines U.S. citizens as “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

Raskin, whose professional background is in constitutional law, said Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order “cut directly against the text of the Constitution, the history of the Constitution, all of the Supreme Court precedent and federal law itself.”

Raskin added that the provision of citizenship to all people born in the U.S. and subject to its laws regardless of race or other characteristics is “the heart of the new constitution that we got out of the Civil War.”

Elrich noted that four out of seven children in Montgomery County have at least one immigrant parent and nearly all of them were born in the United States.

‘Profoundly objectionable’

Also this week, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states may restrict transgender athletes’ participation in sports at publicly funded schools. It also struck down a federal law that capped spending by political parties in coordination with candidates.

Raskin said he found the court’s campaign finance decision, among others, “profoundly objectionable.” He said the decision would allow “unlimited money” to flood campaigns ahead of the midterm elections in November.

Regarding the transgender rights case, Raskin said the Supreme Court’s opinion allows exclusion, but does not require it.

“There’s been such hysteria and such distortion of this issue that it has blocked from view the central point, which is athletics and sports are there for everybody,” Raskin said. “Local governments can and should continue to do the right thing and to make all of these choices in a way that fits our values and our priorities.”

- Advertisement -

The Supreme Court’s decision to allow a ban on transgender women and girls’ participation in all-female sporting events is not its first concerning LGBTQ+ topics in schools.

In May 2023, a group of parents sued Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) for not allowing families to opt out of lessons and classroom materials they object to on religious grounds, such as books with LGBTQ+ characters.

The case made it to the Supreme Court, which in June 2025 decided that the school district’s policy posed “a very real threat of undermining the religious beliefs and practices that the parents wish to instill.”

Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor, MCPS announced a new policy — sending home one-page overviews of classroom topics and readings every nine weeks that classes will cover in order to allow families to opt out of books if they choose. Few families have chosen to do so, according to a Bethesda Today analysis in October.

Call for reform

Raskin on Thursday renewed his call for Supreme Court reforms, arguing that justices should be bound by the same ethics rules as federal judges and that they should have to explain the reasoning behind rulings they issue on an emergency basis.

With rulings issued on an emergency basis, justices infrequently provide an explanation for how they voted. The Supreme Court’s emergency or “shadow” docket also allows parties to seek relief directly from the highest court, bypassing the usual appellate process.

“I’ve got legislation about the shadow docket to require the Supreme Court to enunciate its reasoning and to state its analysis and to stop overturning all these lower court [decisions] with one sentence or one paragraph,” Raskin said.

Whether and how Congress should act to change the number and composition of justices on the Supreme Court is a complicated question, Raskin said, noting that partisan maneuvering around court vacancies and appointments have become commonplace.

He said he would favor an approach that allows for more equitable geographic representation on the court.

“We’ve got 13 federal circuits in America. We only have nine justices,” Raskin said. “We have entire parts of the country where we have no representation on the court — so that’s one way to think about what we really could be doing to rebalance things.”

Digital Partners

Originally published at Bethesdamagazine