Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship, Rejecting Trump Administration’s Executive Order

On June 30, 2026, the Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling confirming that children born on U.S. soil to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present are citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment. Justice John Roberts wrote the majority, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Amy Coney Barrett. Justice Brett Kavanaugh concurred in part; Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch filed dissenting opinions, with Thomas authoring a 90-page dissent.

The Guardian

Birthright citizenship stems from the Fourteenth Amendment (1868), reversing the Dred Scott ruling. The 1884 case United States v. Wong Kim Ark affirmed that a child born to parents with permanent domicile in the United States is a citizen. In February 2025, President Donald Trump issued an executive order to reinterpret “subject to the jurisdiction” so that children of non-citizen, non-permanent-resident, or temporary-status parents would be excluded, effective 19 February 2025.

The Guardian

President Donald Trump and Solicitor General John Sauer represented the administration. The ACLU, with attorney Cecillia Wang, defended the plaintiffs. Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion; Justice Clarence Thomas led the dissent, joined by Justices Alito and Gorsuch. The administration cited disbarred former White House lawyer John Eastman for historical arguments.

The Guardian

The order projected “hundreds of thousands” of newborns would lose automatic citizenship from 19 February 2025; no exact figure disclosed.

The Guardian

The majority reviewed the Fourteenth Amendment’s text and history, finding no intent for a domicile limitation. It rejected the administration’s reliance on “domicile” and obscure sources, noting no evidence the framers imposed such a restriction.

The Guardian

Legal scholars and civil-rights groups called the “domicile” argument unfounded, noting the brief relied on late-19th-century white supremacist writings and on disbarred attorney John Eastman. Critics said the approach relied on obscure sources. Trump has repeatedly attacked courts and judges that rule against him.

The Guardian

• “Children born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily present are ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ of the United States and are citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause,” — Supreme Court majority opinion

The Guardian

• “The 14th amendment’s fixed bright line rule has contributed to the growth and thriving of our nation,” — Cecillia Wang, ACLU attorney

The Guardian

• “Unrestricted birthright citizenship contradicts the practice of the overwhelming majority of modern nations,” — John Sauer, Solicitor General

The Guardian

• “very quirky” — John Roberts, Chief Justice (during oral arguments)

The Guardian

The sources give no exact number of children affected nor data on families impacted before the order was blocked.

The Guardian

The ruling restores the pre-order status quo and renders the directive unenforceable. The Court previously ruled against Trump on his broad emergency tariffs.

The Guardian