The United States Supreme Court on June 30, 2026, ruled against President Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship for children born on U.S. soil. The court’s majority held that the order violated the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which grants citizenship to virtually all persons born in the United States, except children of foreign diplomats.

The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868 during the Reconstruction era following the US Civil War, was designed to codify the rights of Black Americans and has been interpreted for over 128 years to guarantee birthright citizenship. Chief Justice Roberts cited the landmark case United States v Wong Kim Ark, reaffirming that all children born in the U.S. and subject to its jurisdiction are citizens at birth.

Trump, who campaigned on ending birthright citizenship during his 2024 presidential bid, argued that his policy would reduce illegal immigration by removing incentives for migrants. He stated, “My policy will choke off a major incentive for continued illegal immigration, deter more migrants from coming and encourage many of the aliens Joe Biden has unlawfully let into our country to go back to their home countries.” Following the ruling, Trump urged Congress to pass legislation to end birthright citizenship, claiming no constitutional amendment would be necessary.

The American Civil Liberties Union, representing plaintiffs challenging the executive order, emphasized that a president cannot change the Constitution by executive fiat. The court’s decision marks a significant setback for Trump’s immigration agenda.

The Center for Immigration Studies noted that annually between 20,000 to 26,000 births occur to women on tourist visas in the U.S., a point raised amid debates on the policy.

Justice Alito dissented, arguing that the ruling preserves incentives for illegal immigration and criticized the birthright citizenship rule as outdated.

This ruling is the third major Supreme Court loss for Trump in recent months, underscoring the judiciary's role in upholding constitutional protections.

Sources