Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship 6-3, Rejects Trump Order

Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship 6-3, Rejects Trump Order

Cover image from dailycaller.com, which was analyzed for this article

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to strike down Trump’s executive order limiting birthright citizenship, affirming the 14th Amendment. The decision drew sharp reactions from both sides, with conservatives vowing further action and progressives hailing it as a major rebuke.

PoliticalOS

Wednesday, July 1, 2026Politics

3 min read

The Court reaffirmed that the Fourteenth Amendment grants citizenship to nearly all children born on U.S. soil, but the 6-3 split and Kavanaugh’s narrower concurrence show the issue remains contested and subject to future legislative or appointment-driven challenges.

What outlets missed

Most coverage omitted the 1898 precedent in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which addressed citizenship for children of non-citizen residents and supplied the primary legal foundation cited by the majority. Several outlets failed to note Kavanaugh’s narrower statutory concurrence, which affects the size of the constitutional majority. Opinion pieces on both sides presented estimates of birth tourism without referencing later revisions to those figures or independent lower counts. Few articles examined the legislative history of the 1866 Civil Rights Act debates that informed the amendment’s text.

Reading:·····

The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that children born in the United States to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present remain citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment. The 6-3 decision struck down an executive order issued by President Trump that sought to deny citizenship in those cases.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion. He stated that the amendment’s text and history extend citizenship to nearly all persons born on U.S. soil. Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the result on statutory grounds rather than the constitutional holding. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch dissented.

The order had argued that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” excludes children whose parents lack permanent legal status. The majority rejected that reading. Roberts noted that the amendment was adopted to secure citizenship for freed slaves and their descendants and has been applied consistently since.

Trump responded on Truth Social that the outcome was “too bad” and urged Congress to pass legislation ending birthright citizenship without a constitutional amendment. White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller called the ruling one of the Court’s most destructive decisions.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said the Court had correctly applied the Constitution. Civil-rights groups described the holding as a reaffirmation of long-settled law.

The case reached the Court after lower courts blocked the order. Oral arguments occurred in April. The decision leaves open the possibility of future legislative efforts, though five justices treated the constitutional question as settled.

The Compass

You just read five takes on one story.

What's your take? Find your political shape in a few minutes.

Take the test