The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected President Donald Trump’s executive order excluding children born to people who are in the United States illegally or temporarily from automatic birthright citizenship.
In a 6-3 ruling, the justices upheld a lower court's decision that blocked Trump's executive order directing U.S. agencies not to recognize the citizenship of children born in the United States if neither parent is an American citizen or legal permanent resident, also called a "green card" holder.
Challengers to Trump's order argued that it violates language in the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment that confers citizenship to those born in the United States who are "subject to the jurisdiction thereof."
Trump issued the order last year on his first day back in office as part of a suite of policies to crack down on illegal immigration.
The Supreme Court weighs in on what it means to be an American citizen just ahead of the July 4 holiday, when the United States marks the 250th anniversary of its founding.
A Class-Action Suit
The legal challenge to Trump's directive, considered by the Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, involved a class-action lawsuit filed in New Hampshire by parents and children whose citizenship was threatened by the directive.The 14th Amendment has long been interpreted as guaranteeing citizenship for babies born in the United States, with only narrow exceptions such as the children of foreign diplomats or members of an enemy occupying force.
The provision at issue, known as the Citizenship Clause, states: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside."
The administration has asserted that the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means that being born in the United States is not enough for citizenship, and excludes the babies of immigrants who are in the country illegally or whose presence is lawful but temporary, such as university students or those on work visas.
Citizenship is granted only to the children of those whose "primary allegiance" is to the United States, including citizens and permanent residents, the administration has argued. Such allegiance is established through "lawful domicile," which lawyers for the administration define as "lawful, permanent residence within a nation, with intent to remain."
'Birth Tourism'
During the arguments, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer, representing the administration, said the promise of citizenship for virtually any baby born on U.S. soil has spawned what he called a sprawling industry of "birth tourism."Sauer said that "uncounted thousands of foreigners from potentially hostile nations have flocked to give birth in the United States in recent decades" to secure citizenship for their children. Asked to explain how serious an issue "birth tourism" has become, Sauer primarily cited media reports and conceded that "no one knows for sure."
The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War of 1861 to 1865 that ended slavery in the United States, and overturned a notorious 1857 Supreme Court decision that had declared that people of African descent could never be U.S. citizens.
During arguments, Sauer described what he saw as the limited purpose of the 14th Amendment Citizenship Clause, saying it was adopted "to grant citizenship to the newly freed slaves and their children, whose allegiance to the United States had been established by generations of domicile here."
Concord, New Hampshire-based U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante in July 2025 let the challenge to Trump's order by the plaintiffs in the case before him proceed as a class, thus allowing the policy to be blocked nationwide.