--- title: "Supreme Court Strikes Down Trump's Birthright-Citizenship Order, Reaffirming the 14th Amendment" description: "The Supreme Court has struck down President Trump's executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship, ruling that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to nearly all children born on U.S. soil — a landmark decision that legal analysts called closer than many had expected." category: "Politics" category_url: https://herald.la/category/politics author: "Camila Reyes" published: 2026-07-02T07:29:09.000Z updated: 2026-07-02T07:29:09.000Z canonical: https://herald.la/article/supreme-court-strikes-down-trump-s-birthright-citizenship-order-reaffirming-the tags: ["Supreme Court", "birthright citizenship", "14th Amendment", "immigration", "Trump", "politics"] --- # Supreme Court Strikes Down Trump's Birthright-Citizenship Order, Reaffirming the 14th Amendment The Supreme Court has struck down President Trump's executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship, ruling that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to nearly all children born on U.S. soil — a landmark decision that legal analysts called closer than many had expected. The Supreme Court has settled, at least for now, one of the most consequential constitutional fights of Trump's second term: it ruled that the Constitution guarantees citizenship to virtually every child born in the United States, striking down the president's order to the contrary. ## What the Court decided In a decision handed down at the end of June, the justices rejected the administration's attempt to deny citizenship to children born to parents in the country illegally or on temporary visas, [SCOTUSblog reported](https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/06/supreme-court-strikes-down-trumps-order-ending-birthright-citizenship/). By the account of court-watchers, the majority — with Chief Justice John Roberts writing — held that such children are "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause, and therefore citizens at birth. Roughly six justices voted to invalidate the order, [the National Constitution Center noted](https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/supreme-court-strikes-down-trumps-birthright-citizenship-executive-order-in-landmark-decision), though they did not all agree on the reasoning — one justice would have struck it on statutory rather than constitutional grounds. ## The reasoning The majority leaned heavily on history and precedent, in particular the Court's 1898 ruling in *United States v. Wong Kim Ark*, which held that a man born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrant parents was a U.S. citizen. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, was written to guarantee citizenship to formerly enslaved people and to repudiate the *Dred Scott* decision; the majority read its "subject to the jurisdiction" language to mean simply being bound by U.S. law, which applies to nearly everyone on American soil. A descendant of Wong Kim Ark welcomed the outcome, [PBS reported](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/great-grandson-of-wong-kim-ark-praises-supreme-court-ruling-affirming-birthright-citizenship). The administration had argued the phrase required parents to hold lawful or permanent status, or to owe political allegiance to the country — a reading the majority rejected. ## The dissents The decision was not unanimous. In dissent, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch argued for a narrower reading of the amendment, contending it was aimed at the children of freed slaves and does not extend automatic citizenship to the children of people present temporarily or unlawfully — an argument that turned on ideas of allegiance and permanent domicile. Some commentators described the vote as closer than the lopsided outcome many had predicted; that characterization is the analysts', not a matter of record. ## Why it matters Birthright citizenship has been settled understanding for more than a century, and the ruling leaves it intact: absent narrow exceptions, such as the children of foreign diplomats, anyone born in the country is a citizen. The decision blocks the executive order Trump signed on returning to office. It does not, however, foreclose the debate entirely — the president noted that Congress could try to legislate on the question, a far higher bar than an executive order, and the dissents signal that some justices remain open to revisiting the issue. For the millions of families potentially affected, the immediate effect is clarity: the rule that has governed American citizenship for generations still stands. ## Sources - [Supreme Court strikes down Trump's order ending birthright citizenship](https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/06/supreme-court-strikes-down-trumps-order-ending-birthright-citizenship/) - [Supreme Court strikes down Trump's birthright citizenship executive order](https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/supreme-court-strikes-down-trumps-birthright-citizenship-executive-order-in-landmark-decision) - [Great-grandson of Wong Kim Ark praises ruling affirming birthright citizenship](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/great-grandson-of-wong-kim-ark-praises-supreme-court-ruling-affirming-birthright-citizenship)