Get the best experience and stay connected to your community with our Spectrum News app. Learn More
Continue in Browser
Get hyperlocal forecasts, radar and weather alerts.
Please enter a valid zipcode.
Save
More than two months after hearing oral arguments, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship is unconstitutional.
In a 6-3 opinion, the court ruled Trump’s order to deny automatic citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants and temporary foreign visitors born on U.S. soil violates the 14th Amendment. The president signed the directive on his Inauguration Day in 2025.
“Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights—to freely participate in our political community,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court. “The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land. We keep that promise today.”
Roberts was joined by conservative Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh as well as liberal Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor in rejecting Trump’s executive order, although Kavanaugh said his decision was based on federal law, not the Constitution.
Roberts cited the 1898 landmark decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark that recognized the amendment granted citizenship to the children of foreign nationals.
"Not surprisingly, then, in the 128 years since, we have repeatedly understood the rule of Wong Kim Ark to guarantee citizenship to all children born in the United States and subject to its power," Roberts said. "We see no reason to depart from that view today."
Conservative Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas dissented.
Thomas wrote in his dissenting opinion that the citizenship clause was never intended for the children of foreign temporary visitors.
The “Court adds to the sad history of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed and understood to secure equal rights for the freed blacks but has instead been repurposed for political projects that the Reconstruction Congress did not support,” Thomas wrote.
Trump responded on social media by calling on Congress to pass legislation.
"The Supreme Court upheld Birthright Citizenship, which is too bad for our Country, but we can easily make it up in Congress through Legislation, with the support of the President, that has now been determined during this process," he wrote on Truth Social. "No long and unwieldy Constitutional Amendment is necessary! Congress should start TODAY to work on ending expensive and unfair to our Country, Birthright Citizenship."
It was especially gratifying that the majority opinion was authored by Chief Justice Roberts, and that Trump appointees Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett agreed with the decision to strike down the order.”
The citizenship clause has historically been interpreted to exclude only the children of enemy combatants and foreign diplomats, as well as Native Americans subject to tribal laws, who gained U.S. citizenship by statute in 1924.
The amendment, which was ratified in 1868, states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens” of the U.S. and their respective states. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 uses similar language.
During opening arguments, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued on behalf of the Trump administration that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” requires parents to be domiciled in and have allegiance to the United States.
The clause “does not extend citizenship to the children of temporary visa holders or illegal aliens. Unlike the newly freed slaves, those visitors lack direct and immediate allegiance to the United States,” Sauer contended.
Trump was in the gallery when Sauer spoke –– marking the first time a sitting president has been present for oral arguments at the Supreme Court.
American Civil Liberties Union National Legal Director Cecillia Wang argued on behalf of the respondent in the case –– Barbara, a new mother from Honduras whose daughter would be denied U.S. citizenship by the executive order.
In a statement Tuesday, Wang said: “The court’s decision reaffirms a fundamental American promise — if you are born here, you are a citizen. A president cannot change the Constitution by executive fiat."
An estimated 255,000 infants born in the U.S. per year over the next 50 years would not be granted citizenship at birth if Trump’s order were allowed to take effect, according to projections made in 2025 by the Research from the Migration Policy Institute and Penn State’s Population Research Institute.
“Ask any American what our citizenship rule is, and they’ll tell you: Everyone born here is a citizen alike,” Wang told the nine-member panel during her opening remarks April 1.
”That rule was enshrined in the 14th Amendment to put it out of the reach of any government official to destroy.”
Leave a Reply