At the center of the legal battle is the wording of the Fourteenth Amendment, which states, in part, “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.”
Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts concluded that the Constitution protects citizenship for children born in the United States even when their parents are in the country illegally or only temporarily.
Roberts wrote, “Children born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily present are ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ of the United States and are citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause.”
Trump wasted little time responding after the ruling became public.
The president first shared an article from Just the News on Truth Social carrying the headline, “Trump’s efforts to reverse birthright citizenship may succeed with or without SCOTUS.” The post signaled that the administration may already be shifting its strategy away from executive action and toward legislation.
Trump followed with a second message calling on Congress to move immediately.
“The Supreme Court upheld Birthright Citizenship, which is too bad for our Country, but we can easily make it up in Congress through Legislation, with the support of the President, that has now been determined during this process.”
He continued with an even stronger appeal to lawmakers.
“No long and unwieldy Constitutional Amendment is necessary! Congress should start TODAY to work on ending expensive and unfair to our Country, Birthright Citizenship. They will have my Complete and Total Support!”
According to the Just the News report Trump highlighted, congressional Republicans have already introduced legislation intended to address the issue.
The outlet reported: “Several bills, most notably the Birthright Citizenship Act introduced by [Texas Rep. Brian] Babin and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., one day after Trump’s inauguration in 2025 (and similar versions in recent Congresses), seek to end or sharply restrict automatic birthright citizenship by amending the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).”
The report further explained how supporters believe Congress could redefine eligibility under existing immigration law.
“These measures would reinterpret the 14th Amendment’s ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’ clause to grant citizenship at birth only to children with at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen, national, lawful permanent resident (LPR) residing in the U.S., or an LPR serving in the military,” the outlet added.
Supporters of tighter immigration enforcement have frequently pointed to statistics regarding births to illegal immigrants as part of the policy debate.
The Center for Immigration Studies estimated that between 225,000 and 250,000 children were born to illegal immigrants in 2023, representing roughly 7 percent of the nation’s approximately 3.6 million births that year.
Not every Republican, however, agrees with Trump’s assessment that legislation alone will settle the matter.
Republican Sens. Mike Lee of Utah and Rand Paul of Kentucky argued following the ruling that a constitutional amendment—not merely an act of Congress—would ultimately be required to change the nation’s birthright citizenship policy.
Meanwhile, the Court’s three dissenting justices—Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch—offered a dramatically different interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Justice Alito argued that the majority had misread the Constitution’s original meaning.
He wrote, “In sum, the Fourteenth Amendment confers citizenship on a person who is born in this country or naturalized only if that person is also ‘not subject to any foreign power.’”
Alito criticized the majority’s interpretation, adding, “The Court interprets ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’ differently. In its view, the phrase simply means subject to the laws that apply to everyone who is present within the country’s borders.”
The justice also warned that the decision could encourage additional illegal immigration by preserving what he described as a major incentive for entering the United States.
Alito observed, “The Court’s interpretation preserves a powerful incentive to enter or remain in this country illegally. Immigrants naturally prefer affluent countries where economic opportunities are available. Other than Canada, the United States will be the only affluent nation where birth alone is enough to establish citizenship.”
He concluded his dissent with a warning about the long-term consequences of the Court’s ruling.
“If the Fourteenth Amendment required these results, the country would have to live with them or amend the Constitution. But the Fourteenth Amendment does not include the rule the Court now imposes on the country. In my judgment, the Court has made a mistake that will seriously affect the country’s future.”
With the Supreme Court rejecting the executive order but leaving the political debate unresolved, the battle over birthright citizenship now appears poised to shift from the courtroom to Capitol Hill, where Trump is urging congressional Republicans to act quickly in pursuit of one of his signature immigration priorities.
How is it the foreign fetuses have citizenship rights, but no right to life – justice Comey, brown???