Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship
Tuesday, Jun 30, 2026 - Posted by Isabel Miller
* From Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment…
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 Associated Press…
A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a broad conception of birthright citizenship, rejecting President Donald Trump’s executive order declaring that children born to people who are in the United States illegally or temporarily are not American citizens. […]
“Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights—to freely participate in our political community. The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land,’” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court, citing congressional debate over the amendment, “We keep that promise today.”
Three conservative justices would have allowed the restrictions to take effect.
Click here for the opinion. The three dissenting justices were Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch. Justice Brett Kavanaugh filed an opinion concurring in the judgement and dissenting in part.
* Attorney General Kwame Raoul…
Attorney General Kwame Raoul today issued the following statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. Barbara.
“Birthright citizenship was not a right solely created by amending the Constitution, as America’s tradition of birthright citizenship predates the 14th Amendment and the abolition of slavery in the United States. The notion that this decision wasn’t unanimous is disappointing, given the plain language of the 14th Amendment.
“As Justice Jackson wrote in her concurrence, the concept of birthright citizenship “was thus not that some new status should be created and conferred on freed Blacks. It was instead that freed Blacks already had a rightful claim to citizenship because they had been born on American soil. After all, the nation, from its founding, had ‘boldly proclaim[ed] that all men are born free and equal, and that consequently life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, are inherent in every individual, vested inalienably by natural birthright.’ No ideal was more inherently American.”
“However, when birthright citizenship was finally enshrined in our Constitution, the text of the amendment was very clear. President Trump’s audacious attempt to rewrite citizenship was one of the first acts he took upon his return to the presidency. On day one, he made clear that this administration does not care about the language of the Constitution, and he has taken several other brazenly unconstitutional actions since. The very first lawsuit I filed against this administration challenged this executive order, and I am gratified by the court’s decision today.
“As someone born to an immigrant mother not yet naturalized at the time, the fight to preserve birthright citizenship has been a personal one. I am disappointed that this was not a unanimous ruling. This case doesn’t require a complex interpretation of the Constitution; the language is plain.”
* Gov. JB Pritzker…
“Today the Supreme Court sided with the Constitution. Since the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, the Constitution has left little to the imagination: all persons born or naturalized in the United States are United States citizens. Today’s ruling reaffirms the foundational values of America and protects the rights and freedoms of those who call it home.
“While this ruling is an important victory, we cannot forget the reason it was necessary: Donald Trump keeps trying to circumvent the Rule of Law through illegal executive actions. Trump’s racism made him unable to understand that birthright citizenship helps make America great. He went after the Fourteenth Amendment because making our country smaller was the only way he could make himself feel bigger.
“Despite his failure today, Donald Trump will continue to test the limits of his power at the expense of the American people. In Illinois, we will remain active and vigilant in standing up for the Constitution, defending the rights it guarantees to every person, and upholding the principles that have long defined our nation.”
* More…
* The Hill | Speaker Johnson: Birthright citizenship ruling subjects US to ‘serious challenges’: “I will say, I’m very disappointed in that outcome,” the Louisiana Republican said. “I think it subjects the country to serious challenges going forward, and we’ll have to deal with it as Congress.” […] “It’s been abused,” he continued. “It’s one of those things that was intended to serve a noble and important purpose and has been thwarted and overused and abused, and so I’m sure that we’ll continue to look at that. I’m sure that the conclusion from this decision is you have to amend the constitution to fix that.”
* The New Republic | Kavanaugh Gives Republicans Road Map to End Birthright Citizenship: His rationale: Trump’s plan to strip American-born second-generation immigrants of their citizenship could work if it were enacted through Congress. “In my view, the Executive Order does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment. But the Order does contravene a federal statute,” Kavanaugh wrote, referring to the law specifying birthright parameters. “Congress could—consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment—amend [this law] or otherwise enact new legislation establishing exceptions to birthright citizenship for children born to foreign citizens unlawfully or temporarily in the country. But Congress has not yet done so.”
- fs - Tuesday, Jun 30, 26 @ 11:54 am:
If Kavanaugh was the 5th and deciding vote his opinion would be a “Road Map to End Birthright Citizenship”…but he wasn’t. It was 5-4 without him. It would take a constitutional amendment to overturn it.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Jun 30, 26 @ 11:59 am:
Again, a ruling that should have been 9-0. Sad.
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Jun 30, 26 @ 12:41 pm:
The legislative history of the amendment, the plain reading of the amendment, and all precedents related to the question supported the majority’s opinion meaning that there is no reasonable way to get a 5-4 ruling. If you look at the legislative debates at the time Congress passed it, Congress rejected similar concerns to today about the Romani using birthright citizenship as an invasion at the time.