The U.S. Supreme Court backed President Donald Trump in its ruling, effectively landing a devastating blow to birthright citizenship. The Supreme Court on Friday handed a procedural victory to Trump, ruling that federal judges went too far in blocking his executive order aimed at curbing birthright citizenship.
Reuters reported that the decision, while significant for executive power, stops short of deciding whether Trump’s proposed limits on citizenship for U.S.-born children of non-citizens are constitutional.
“GIANT WIN in the United States Supreme Court! Even the Birthright Citizenship Hoax has been, indirectly, hit hard. It had to do with the babies of slaves (same year!), not the SCAMMING of our Immigration process. Congratulations to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Solicitor General John Sauer, and the entire DOJ. News Conference at the White House, 11:30 A.M. EST,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.
The court’s opinion, authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, orders lower courts in Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington state to revisit the sweeping nationwide injunctions they imposed against Trump’s directive. Those injunctions had entirely halted enforcement of his order, which seeks to deny U.S. citizenship to children born on American soil unless at least one parent is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.
As a result of the ruling, Trump’s order could now take effect in certain states where no court ruling currently blocks it, potentially creating uneven enforcement of citizenship laws across the U.S. The lower courts have been instructed to revisit the case and consider more limited, plaintiff-specific rulings.
This ruling strengthens presidential authority by making it harder for courts to issue broad orders that halt federal policies nationwide. While Trump celebrated it as a major win, the core legal question, whether his approach to birthright citizenship is lawful, remains unresolved. The final outcome will likely depend on future court decisions, but for now, the ruling gives Trump and similar executive actions more room to operate.
Birthright citizenship in the United States means that any person born on U.S. soil automatically becomes a U.S. citizen, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. This principle is based on the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” This has been interpreted to mean that nearly all children born in the U.S. are citizens by birth, except for those born to foreign diplomats.
READ: Abraham Verghese underscores immigrants’ contributions to American life (June 2, 2025)
The 1898 Supreme Court case United States v. Wong Kim Ark confirmed this right by ruling that a child born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents was a citizen under the 14th Amendment. Today, this ruling still protects birthright citizenship, including for children of undocumented immigrants.
The justices typically break for the summer and return for a new term in October, although they will still likely have to continue acting on cases that reach them on an emergency basis. Such cases have been reaching the court with increasing frequency since Trump took office.
The U.S. remains one of the few developed countries that guarantees citizenship to nearly everyone born on its soil, making birthright citizenship a central part of American immigration policy and national identity.
READ: ITServe calls for immigration reform, doubling H-1B cap to 130,000 (June 16, 2025)
According to media reports, the Supreme Court — which holds a 6-3 conservative majority — has six cases remaining this term in which it heard oral arguments. The current term began in October 2024. Among the pending cases is one involving birthright citizenship, along with several others, including:
- Whether conservative religious parents can opt their elementary school-age children out of LGBTQ-themed books in class.
- Long-running litigation over whether congressional districts in Louisiana are lawful.
- A law enacted in Texas that imposes age-restrictions for using adult websites.
- A challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s preventive care task force.
- A Federal Communications Commission program that subsidizes phone and internet services in underserved areas.