Let’s imagine a court brief describing the Adriana Smith case from the perspective of the citizen mother and non-citizen fetus.
Brief for Petitioners
In the matter of Adriana Smith, Deceased, by her family and estate
Statement of Facts
Adriana Smith, a thirty-year-old registered nurse and United States citizen, was declared brain dead in February 2025 while approximately nine weeks pregnant. Under Georgia’s abortion restrictions, Emory University Hospital maintained Smith on life support for the sole purpose of sustaining her pregnancy. Smith’s family objected to this continuation of medical intervention, but the hospital and State authorities determined that Georgia law required continuation until the fetus reached viability.
In June 2025, Smith’s child was delivered by emergency Caesarean section, after which Smith was removed from life support.
Question Presented
Whether the State of Georgia, by compelling the continuation of life support on a citizen to preserve a pregnancy, violated the United States Constitution by:
- Elevating the legal status of a fetus — an undocumented non-citizen — above the rights of a living citizen.
- Usurping the exclusive Federal power over the creation of citizenship, as established by the Fourteenth Amendment and Article I.
Argument
I. The Fourteenth Amendment establishes that only persons “born…in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” are citizens.
A fetus, prior to live birth, is not a citizen. The constitutional moment of status change — non-citizen to citizen — occurs at birth. Until then, the fetus exists outside the jurisdiction of the United States for purposes of rights and protections.
By treating Adriana Smith’s pregnancy as the bearer of enforceable rights, Georgia effectively declared the fetus to be a rights-holding person. This act contradicts the text of the Fourteenth Amendment and introduces a category of “unborn citizen” unknown to U.S. law.
II. Citizenship creation is a Federal, not State, power.
Article I grants Congress exclusive authority over naturalization. The Fourteenth Amendment constitutionalized birthright citizenship. States cannot legislate the moment or conditions of citizenship creation.
By compelling medical treatment to ensure the birth of a child, Georgia intruded upon the Federal Government’s exclusive domain. The State thereby coerced the production of a new citizen — a sovereign function beyond State jurisdiction.
III. The State subordinated the rights of a living citizen to the interests of a non-citizen.
Adriana Smith, a U.S. citizen, retained her rights to medical autonomy and dignity even after brain death, exercised through her family as legal surrogates. Georgia’s actions negated those rights in favor of an entity the Constitution does not recognize as a citizen.
This inversion of hierarchy — granting greater protection to a non-citizen fetus than to a citizen woman — constitutes a direct violation of equal protection and due process guarantees.
Conclusion
The Adriana Smith case is not a tragic ethical dilemma but a constitutional violation. By coercing medical intervention to preserve a pregnancy, the State of Georgia:
- Invented a legal category of “unborn citizen,” contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Usurped the Federal Government’s exclusive jurisdiction over citizenship creation.
- Stripped a living citizen of her constitutional rights in favor of a non-citizen.
This Court should hold that such State action is unconstitutional and reaffirm that there are no unborn Americans.