The South Asian American Justice Collaborative (SAAJCO) joined hundreds of community members and advocates outside the US Supreme Court as justices heard oral arguments in a closely watched case on birthright citizenship.Calling the moment “fundamental,” SAAJCO representatives said the case could have far-reaching consequences for immigrant communities, particularly South Asians, one of the fastest-growing immigrant groups in the United States.“The energy today was powerful… this is about recognizing that when one community is impacted, we all are,” said Chirag Shah, programme manager at SAAJCO, underscoring the collective nature of the mobilisation.The case centres on challenges to an executive order that seeks to reinterpret the scope of the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to those born on US soil. Legal experts say any shift in interpretation could redefine long-standing constitutional protections.Trump’s executive order (EO), which was signed soon after he took office, points out that the 14th Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the US. It has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the US but not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’ In the context of legal immigrants, the EO stated: “The privilege of US citizenship does not automatically extend to persons born in the US: When the mother’s presence in the US at the time of said person’s birth was lawful but temporary (such as, but not limited to, visiting the US under the auspices of the Visa Waiver Program or visiting on a student, work, or tourist visa) and the father was not a US citizen or lawful permanent resident (which means a green card holder) at the time of said person’s birth.”Concerns over retroactive impact and immigrant statusSAAJCO, which also submitted an amicus brief in the case, highlighted historical parallels and warned against narrowing constitutional guarantees.“Two things stood out. Justice Sotomayor rightly raised the denaturalization of South Asians after Thind ruling and whether changes to birthright citizenship could be applied retroactively. Reading new conditions into the 14th Amendment is already deeply concerning. While the government offered assurances about limiting its scope, those limits may not hold over time. This administration has not thought through how far-reaching the implications are,” said Kalpana V. Peddibhotla, Executive Director of SAAJCO. “Second, the government relied on the idea of ‘temporary visitors’ to argue that birthright citizenship should turn on domicile. That directly implicates families who have lived here for years or decades on H-1B visas, in asylum, and in other statuses due to green card backlogs.” Risk of statelessness flaggedLegal experts and advocacy groups have also raised alarms about the administrative and humanitarian fallout if the order is upheld. According to SAAJCO legal director Anisa Rahim, the court itself acknowledged potential administrative burdens during arguments.“For South Asians… that means many babies would be denied citizenship at birth,” Rahim said, warning that some could be left stateless. She added that several South Asian countries do not automatically grant citizenship to children born abroad, which could exacerbate the risk of statelessness for affected families.Broader implicationsAdvocates argue that the case goes beyond legal technicalities, touching on identity, belonging and the rights of immigrant communities in the US. SAAJCO’s amicus brief challenges the notion of South Asians as “forever foreign” and underscores their long-standing presence in the country.With the court’s decision expected in the coming months, the outcome could reshape immigration law and citizenship rights, with ripple effects across communities—including a large Indian diaspora closely following developments.For now, groups like SAAJCO say they will continue mobilising public support and legal advocacy as the case unfolds.