The Supreme Court is expected to rule later this month on legal challenges to President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to limit birthright citizenship. As the case moves toward a decision, questions are emerging about how immigration authorities could respond if the order is ultimately blocked.
According to reporting by Newsweek, former Obama administration immigration officialLeon Fresco has warned that some green card applicants could face greater scrutiny during the adjudication process. Speaking on a Bloomberg podcast on June 2, Fresco said immigration officials may focus more closely on specific categories of applicants rather than pursuing broad policy changes that could trigger immediate legal challenges.
Certain Immigration Pathways Could Receive Greater Scrutiny
Fresco, who previously led the Office of Immigration Litigation during the Obama administration and is now a partner at Holland & Knight, identified visa overstays as one group that could be affected.
According to Bloomberg, as cited by Newsweek, he pointed specifically to individuals who entered the United States legally, remained after their visas expired, and later had children born in the country. Those children, once they reach age 21, can sponsor their parents for lawful permanent residency under existing immigration rules.
Fresco suggested that if the Supreme Court rejects efforts to restrict birthright citizenship, immigration authorities could respond by examining applications connected to that pathway more closely. Rather than imposing a formal prohibition, he said officials could rely on existing discretionary authority during individual case reviews. “They’re going to be very angry about that decision,” Fresco said, according to Newsweek.
He also warned that applicants seeking green cards through marriage to U.S. citizens could encounter additional scrutiny if they previously overstayed visas. Fresco argued that immigration officers already possess broad discretion when evaluating individual cases and could use that authority to deny applications that fail to satisfy discretionary standards. Fresco suggested that acase-by-case review process could prove effective because it would not require a blanket policy change.
Debate Unfolds as Administration Clarifies Green Card Guidance
The discussion comes as the Trump administration continues to pursue tighter controls on legal immigration while also implementing several travel restrictions.
Newsweek reported that the Department of Homeland Security recently clarified guidance affecting green card applicants. Earlier U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services guidance appeared to indicate that applicants would generally need to leave the United States while their cases were processed, except under extraordinary circumstances.
Officials have since stated that decisions will remain discretionary and will be handled individually. Traditionally, many eligible applicants have been allowed to stay in the United States while seeking permanent residency through adjustment of status.
Fresco noted that many applicants are reluctant to leave the country because of employment and family obligations. According to Newsweek, he said departing the United States can lead to job loss and, in cases involving marriages to U.S. citizens, extended family separation. He also observed that applicants outside the country often have fewer options for challenging immigration decisions.
The broader debate is unfolding alongside litigation over Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship. Opponents argue the order conflicts with the 14th Amendment’s citizenship guarantee for people born in the United States. Multiple federal courts have blocked the order from taking effect, and the Supreme Court is now considering the dispute.
A ruling is expectedlater this month, with potential implications for immigration policy and the processing of future green card applications.
