Law & Courts

Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship, Rejecting Trump’s Proposed Limits

By The Associated Press — June 30, 2026 4 min read
Members of the Supreme Court sit for a group portrait in Washington, Oct. 7, 2022. Bottom row, from left, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Samuel Alito and Justice Elena Kagan. Top row, from left, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Justice Neil Gorsuch, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. The Supreme Court justices will take the bench Monday, July 1, 2024, to release their last few opinions of the term, including their most closely watched case: whether former President Donald Trump has immunity from criminal prosecution.
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a broad conception of birthright citizenship, rejecting President Donald Trump’s executive order declaring that children born in the United States to undocumented immigrants or temporary foreign residents are not American citizens.

The justices relied on a long-settled understanding of the 14th Amendment, adopted after the Civil War, and more recent federal laws in ruling that anyone born in the country, with very limited exceptions, is a citizen.

“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.”

See Also

President Donald Trump signs an executive order on birthright citizenship in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, Jan. 20, 2025.
President Donald Trump signs an executive order on birthright citizenship in the Oval Office of the White House on Jan. 20, 2025. The order, now before the U.S. Supreme Court, seeks to limit citizenship for some children born in the United States to immigrant parents without permanent legal status.
Evan Vucci/AP

Three conservative justices would have allowed the restrictions to take effect.

“The Court today takes the extraordinary step of holding facially unconstitutional the President’s Order excluding from citizenship the children of foreign temporary visitors and illegal aliens,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a 91-page dissent, more than three times as long as Roberts’ opinion. “In doing so, the Court adds to the sad history of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed and understood to secure equal rights for the freed blacks but has instead been repurposed for political projects that the Reconstruction Congress did not support.”

The Republican president’s restrictions had been blocked by several lower courts and had not taken effect anywhere in the U.S.

During arguments in April, both conservative and liberal justices questioned the order’s legality in a momentous case that was magnified by Trump’s unprecedented attendance in the courtroom.

The case framed another test of Trump’s assertions of executive power that defy long-standing precedent for a court with a conservative majority and a robust view of presidential power that has largely ruled in his favor. In the notable exceptions when the court has not, Trump has responded with starkly personal criticisms of the justices.

The justices ruled on Trump’s appeal of a lower-court ruling from New Hampshire that struck down the citizenship restrictions.

The birthright citizenship order, which Trump signed on the first day of his second term, is part of his administration’s broad immigration crackdown.

Birthright citizenship was the first Trump immigration-related policy to reach the court for a final ruling. The justices previously struck down global tariffs Trump had imposed under an emergency powers law that had never been used that way.

Trump reacted furiously to the late February tariffs decision, saying he was ashamed of the justices who ruled against him and calling them unpatriotic.

He also seemed to recognize the court was likely to rule against him on birthright citizenship, too, using his Truth Social platform to criticize “dumb judges and justices” and wealthy pregnant women from China and elsewhere who come to the U.S. to give birth so their newborns will have American citizenship.

Trump’s order would have upended widely held views that the 14th Amendment confers citizenship on everyone born in the U.S., excluding only the children of foreign diplomats and those born to a foreign occupying force.

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., center, is joined by, from left, Rep. Lisa McClain, R-Mich., chair of the House Republican Conference, Rep. Beth Van Duyne, R-Texas, and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., reacts to news of the Supreme Court decision on birthright citizenship as he talks to reporters, at the Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, June 30, 2026.

The amendment was intended to ensure that Black people, including former slaves, had citizenship, though the Citizenship Clause is written more broadly. “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,” it reads.

In a series of decisions, lower courts have struck down Trump’s executive order as illegal. The decisions have invoked the high court’s 1898 ruling in Wong Kim Ark, which held that the U.S.-born child of Chinese nationals was a citizen.

Roberts, joined by Justice Amy Coney Barrett and the three liberal justices, said the amendment’s language, the historical context and the 1898 case make clear that children born to undocumented immigrants or parents temporarily in the U.S. “are citizens at birth.”

But there was only a bare majority of five justices on the constitutional question.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh sided with the majority, but only because of a federal law that makes those children citizens.

Kavanaugh joined the dissenters in finding that Trump’s order does not violate the Constitution. His view would enable a future Congress to change the law to restrict birthright citizenship.

The Trump administration had argued that the common view of citizenship is wrong, asserting that children of noncitizens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and therefore are not entitled to citizenship.

More than one-quarter of a million babies born in the U.S. each year would have been affected by the executive order, according to research by the Migration Policy Institute and Pennsylvania State University’s Population Research Institute.

While Trump has largely focused on illegal immigration in his rhetoric and actions, the birthright citizenship restrictions also would have applied to people who are legally in the United States, including students and applicants for green cards, or permanent resident status.

Related Tags:

Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

Events

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts What Schools Need to Know About the Supreme Court’s Transgender Sports Ruling
The justices upheld two state laws that bar transgender girls from participating in female sports.
10 min read
A group prays outside of the Supreme Court ahead of the court's ruling on whether transgender girls and women can play on school athletic teams, on June 30, 2026, on Capitol Hill in Washington.
A group prays outside of the U.S. Supreme Court ahead of the court's ruling on whether transgender girls and women can play on school athletic teams, on June 30, 2026, in Washington. The court upheld two state laws barring transgender girls from joining girls' school sports teams.
Jose Luis Magana/AP
Law & Courts Judges Strike Down Trump Admin.'s Student Loan Forgiveness Overhaul
Two judges sided with advocates who said the program risked becoming a tool for political retribution.
3 min read
In this May 5, 2018, file photo, graduates at the University of Toledo commencement ceremony in Toledo, Ohio.
Graduates at the University of Toledo commencement ceremony in Toledo, Ohio, on May 5, 2018. Two judges have ruled against the Trump administration's overhaul of a public service loan forgiveness program for which teachers have qualified.
Carlos Osorio/AP
Law & Courts States Can Ban Transgender Athletes, Supreme Court Decides
The court ruled that state bans in Idaho and West Virginia don’t violate the Constitution or Title IX.
3 min read
People advocate for a ban on transgender women and girls participating in women's and girls' sports outside the U.S. Supreme Court building as the court announced decisions in Washington, on June 29, 2026.
People advocate for a ban on transgender women and girls participating in women's and girls' sports outside the U.S. Supreme Court building as the court announced decisions in Washington, on June 29, 2026. The Supreme Court ruled on June 30, 2026, that states may enforce laws restricting transgender athletes’ participation on girls’ and women’s sports teams.
Francis Chung/Politico via AP
Law & Courts Judge Voids Trump Admin. Rule Excluding Education From ‘Professional’ Degrees
A judge ruled the agency didn't have the authority to adopt such a narrow definition.
4 min read
Graduates in the School of Education hold up books as their degrees are conferred during Harvard's 371st Commencement, on May 26, 2022, in Cambridge, Mass.
Graduates in the School of Education hold up books during Harvard's 371st Commencement on May 26, 2022, in Cambridge, Mass. The Trump administration excluded education fields when it set a definition of "professional" degree to implement a new law instituting graduate student borrowing limits.
Mary Schwalm/AP