Long-Term Takoma Park Residents Urge Supreme Court to Reject Birthright Neighborhood Citizenship

TAKOMA PARK, MD – A coalition of longtime Takoma Park residents is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that babies born within city limits should not automatically qualify as full neighborhood citizens, warning that such a ruling could unintentionally bring unwanted change.

The group, called Citizen Continuity Vision of Takoma (CCVT), filed an amicus brief arguing that birthright residency, if recognized locally, could undermine what they describe as Takoma Park’s “so fully realized progressivism that it now requires conservative stewardship.”

“If you say birth alone makes you a resident, you’re basically saying anyone can just show up and belong,” said spokesperson Harold Whitman, who has lived in Takoma Park for 41 years. “That’s a slippery slope. First it’s babies, then it’s accessory dwelling units, then suddenly we’re shutting down our beloved pool just to remodel the elementary school to accommodate ‘growth’.”

The group is asking the Court to affirm that residency must be earned through lived experience, including opposing at least one decades-long zoning change, publicly lamenting the loss of a local business they only visited twice, and spending every Sunday morning at the farmers market explaining why the neighborhood was better before everyone else moved here.

Opponents of the proposal say the effort misunderstands constitutional law, but supporters insist Takoma Park is uniquely situated.

“This isn’t about denying babies’ rights,” clarified Beatrice Henry, a ward one resident since the Carter administration. “We just worry that once you start acknowledging they belong here, someone will suggest accommodating them. And that’s how it starts.”

The coalition expressed concern that recognizing infants as full residents could establish a precedent where people who were born here might eventually feel entitled to stay here, creating an unsettling scenario for neighborhood stability. They also proposed potential safeguards, including requiring new parents to submit a traffic study before being granted stroller access to certain streets.

At press time, the highest court had not indicated whether it would take up the case, though sources confirmed that at least one justice expressed frustration that CCVT also demanded hundreds of free parking spaces at the front steps of the Supreme Court Building during oral arguments.