The Supreme Court has rejected President Donald Trump's effort to end birthright citizenship, delivering a significant blow to the administration's approach to immigration and citizenship.
The court's decision, described as a landmark ruling, halts the president's attempt to terminate birthright citizenship, deeming it "blatantly unconstitutional and out of bounds."
Birthright citizenship is constitutionally guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868 to ensure citizenship for freed slaves. It has since been applied to all individuals born on U.S. soil or its territories.
The case, Trump v. Barbara, involved an executive order signed by Trump in February 2025, which aimed to end birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to noncitizen parents. This order, which has not taken full effect, was immediately challenged by states and civil rights groups, including the ACLU, which argued that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil.
This legal challenge pitted the Supreme Court's precedent against the expansion of executive power. The administration's legal team argued for a narrow interpretation of the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause, which states, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens." They contended that children born to parents not lawfully in the U.S. were not fully "subject to the jurisdiction" of the country, and therefore their children should not automatically be citizens.
Opponents countered that a ruling in favor of Trump's administration would overturn long-held notions of citizenship and create immediate, operational consequences for newborns in the U.S., requiring Congress and the administration to clarify their status.
The stakes were high, impacting an estimated 150,000 children born annually in the U.S. to noncitizens.
During oral arguments in April, many justices appeared skeptical of the administration's arguments. Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. described a key argument from the Trump administration as "quirky," noting difficulty in reconciling the administration's listed exceptions to birthright citizenship—such as children of ambassadors or those born on warships—with the broader group the order sought to affect. Roberts stated, "We're in a new world now," but the Constitution remains the same.
Justices appointed by Trump, including Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch, also seemed unconvinced. Justice Kavanaugh pointed to the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, which he noted largely mirrors the text of the 14th Amendment and a 1898 Supreme Court case. He suggested that if Congress intended to alter the scope of birthright citizenship, it would have used different language.
Trump had made history in April by being the first sitting president to attend Supreme Court oral arguments in person, underscoring the importance of the case to his administration.
The case, Trump v. Barbara, was brought by a group of affected families nationwide, supported by the ACLU and other organizations. They maintained that the 14th Amendment has been consistently interpreted for over a century to guarantee citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil, a stance further supported by laws passed by Congress in subsequent decades.
Lower courts had previously struck down Trump's attempt to end birthright citizenship by executive order as unconstitutional. The Supreme Court's latest ruling affirms these earlier decisions and upholds the established understanding of the 14th Amendment.