Publications

Brief of Student Political Research Initiative for New Governance (SPRING) and Youth Scholars as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents

Student Political Research Initiative for New Governance (SPRING)
Supreme Court of the United States — Trump v. CASA, Inc. (Nos. 24A884, 24A885, 24A886), 2025
BibTeX
@misc{spring2025casa,
  author       = {{Student Political Research Initiative for New Governance (SPRING) and Youth Scholars}},
  title        = {Brief of Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents},
  year         = {2025},
  month        = apr,
  howpublished = {Supreme Court of the United States, Nos. 24A884, 24A885, 24A886},
  note         = {Trump v. CASA, Inc.; Trump v. Washington; Trump v. New Jersey}
}

Abstract

Considering the extensive briefing in these cases and cognizant of the preliminary status, amici write for the limited purpose of calling to the Court's attention matters concerning the risk of harm to student-scholars and the significant public interest in securing their ability to make contributions to our society by affirming the preliminary injunctions entered below. The important role of youth voices, and threats to them, should not be overlooked amid the extreme rhetoric and politicization of immigration that has crystallized around Executive Order 14160 ("Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship"), which purports to erase the presumption of U.S. citizenship for all persons born in the U.S. In particular, children of immigrants contribute to the public good in countless ways, including through research, publications, and engaging in thoughtful social discourse. They facilitate the free exchange of ideas with those who are not first-generation U.S. citizens, who in turn benefit from the ability to exchange views with people who hold dissimilar perspectives. This can only happen if they are free to speak without fear. Young people are now living with an undeniable level of uncertainty — in what this country will stand for and in how our system of constitutional democracy and the rule of law will respond (and even hold). When fundamental rights are questioned, they should be able to remain certain that the courts will, at minimum, respond by preserving status quo ante rights while the deliberation proceeds.