Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship as Congressional Battle Over Policy Looms

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on June 30, 2026 to strike down President Trump's Executive Order 14160 and reaffirm birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the Amendment was meant to put the question of citizenship "once and forever to rest." The ruling instantly shifted the political battle from the courts to Congress.
Trump responded within hours on Truth Social, calling the ruling "too bad for our Country" and pushing Congress to act. Speaker Mike Johnson called the current interpretation "grossly abused" by birth tourism trends. The fight over who is automatically a U.S. citizen is now heading to Capitol Hill.
The court's 6-3 ruling struck down EO 14160, which Trump signed on his first day in office. The order had tried to deny automatic citizenship to children born in the U.S. if their parents were undocumented or on temporary visas. Roberts said domicile — meaning permanent residency — is not a constitutional requirement for citizenship at birth.
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a 91-page dissent — 27,477 words — joined by Justices Gorsuch and Alito. Thomas argued the 14th Amendment was a race-conscious fix for freed slaves after the Civil War, not a broad rule for temporary visitors. He said the majority ruling "adds to the sad history of the Fourteenth Amendment." ACLU National Legal Director Cecillia Wang, who argued the case, called the decision proof that "a president cannot change the Constitution by executive fiat."
Within hours of the ruling, Speaker Johnson and Senator Tom Cotton announced a renewed push for the Constitutional Citizenship Clarification Act (HR 4741). The bill aims to redefine "subject to the jurisdiction" in the 14th Amendment more narrowly. Cotton argues children of those with "hostile" or temporary presence should not get automatic citizenship.
Senator Rand Paul broke from that approach. He says real change needs a full constitutional amendment, not a regular law. Legal experts agree the path is steep. Professor Bill Ong Hing of USF noted the 6-3 vote shows a "more fragile consensus" than before. If one Democratic-appointed justice is replaced by a conservative, the principle could shift dramatically.
The Department of Justice is not waiting on Congress. On July 1, DOJ Fraud Division head Colin McDonald issued a memo telling federal prosecutors to go after birth tourism businesses. The memo targets companies like "USA Happy Baby Inc." that coach foreign nationals to hide their pregnancies during visa interviews. Prosecutors will use visa fraud laws under 18 U.S.C. § 1546, plus wire fraud and money laundering charges.
The Migration Policy Institute estimates up to 26,000 U.S. births per year — less than 1% of all births — are linked to birth tourism. The McDonald memo calls on U.S. Attorneys to "zealously protect the sanctity of United States citizenship." The crackdown targets the small slice of cases where foreign nationals allegedly lie on visa applications specifically to give birth on American soil.
The numbers behind this debate are large. About 255,000 babies are born each year in the U.S. to undocumented parents or those on temporary visas. Under EO 14160, those children would have been left stateless. Ending birthright citizenship could also have added 2.7 million people to the unauthorized U.S. population by 2045, according to research cited in the case.
A study by the Center for Migration Studies and FWD.us found that birthright citizens born between 1975 and 2074 will contribute $7.7 trillion to the U.S. economy. A May 2026 AP-NORC poll found 65% of Americans support citizenship for all children born on U.S. soil. That number drops to 50/50 when the question is specifically about children of undocumented parents.
Publishers
5
Articles
5
Reach
5