On Thursday, former President Donald Trump once again advocated for ending birthright citizenship in the United States. This move comes just before the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on whether lower-court judges have the authority to issue nationwide injunctions that halt executive actions while legal battles are still ongoing. Trump's administration has faced several instances where executive orders, covering a wide array of issues, were blocked by federal district court judges. In a social media post, Trump highlighted the significance of the Supreme Court case. He argued that birthright citizenship was not intended for individuals who temporarily visit the United States to gain permanent citizenship for themselves and their families, often at the expense of American resources. Trump further expressed that such actions are seen as taking advantage of the country. On his first day back in the White House in January, Trump signed an executive order claiming that the 14th Amendment of the Constitution does not automatically grant citizenship to everyone born in the United States—a practice that has been accepted for many years. Trump's interpretation of the amendment suggests that it was originally intended to provide citizenship only to children of formerly enslaved individuals, not to address issues related to illegal immigration. In his Truth Social post, Trump criticized what he sees as misuse of the amendment by people who seek to exploit the U.S. immigration system. He urged the Supreme Court to consider this perspective when deliberating on the matter. The Supreme Court's hearing on Thursday is not expected to directly address the constitutionality of Trump's executive order. Instead, the focus will be on whether district court judges have the authority to issue nationwide injunctions against such orders or if their jurisdiction should be limited to specific states or individuals involved in the lawsuits. The case involves three separate federal district court lawsuits challenging Trump's order. Two of these cases were brought forward by more than 20 states and two cities, while the third was filed by five pregnant non-citizens and two immigrant advocacy groups. In each instance, the judges issued orders blocking the implementation of Trump's executive order, a decision that was largely upheld by three federal circuit courts of appeals. This is an ongoing situation, and updates are anticipated as the legal proceedings continue. Readers are encouraged to check back for further developments on this significant legal battle. For those interested in staying informed, there are options to sign up for free newsletters that deliver news directly to your inbox. This provides a convenient way to receive updates not only on this case but also on other global business and financial news, stock quotes, and market data and analysis. The article also notes that CNBC, a division of NBCUniversal, reserves all rights to the content, and data is provided as a real-time snapshot, albeit with a slight delay. Additionally, the article contains information on how personal data may be used for targeted online advertising, along with instructions on how residents of certain states can opt-out of such data-sharing practices in accordance with privacy laws.