Supreme Court Weighs Trump’s Push to Curb Birthright Citizenship

• May 16, 2025

The U.S. Supreme Court is reviewing former President Donald Trump’s executive order that seeks to limit birthright citizenship, a major shift in how the 14th Amendment has long been interpreted.

The order, signed on Trump’s first day back in office, directs federal agencies not to recognize as U.S. citizens any children born on American soil to parents who are neither U.S. citizens nor lawful permanent residents. This move challenges over a century of legal precedent, particularly the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause, which has been interpreted to guarantee citizenship to nearly all individuals born in the United States.

While the Court’s conservative majority appears open to limiting the use of nationwide injunctions—orders from lower courts that have temporarily blocked Trump’s directive—none of the justices have expressed clear support for the order itself. Liberal justices strongly oppose it, saying it contradicts the Constitution and would leave thousands of children born in the U.S. without citizenship, access to benefits, or legal protections.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor raised concerns about the real-life effects of the policy, warning it would result in stateless children and create uncertainty for hospitals and government agencies. Justice Elena Kagan also highlighted that without broad injunctions, the issue might not be fully resolved for years, during which many families could be left in legal limbo.

The administration is also asking the Supreme Court to restrict lower courts from issuing universal injunctions, arguing these orders overstep their authority and should be limited to the parties directly involved in lawsuits. Some conservative justices suggested class-action lawsuits might be a more appropriate way to seek broader relief, but lawyers for the states argued that such procedures often don’t apply when states are involved.

Trump’s legal team argues that the 14th Amendment was meant to apply primarily to children of former slaves, not to children of people in the U.S. illegally or on temporary visas. But critics point to the 1898 Supreme Court case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which affirmed that children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents are citizens under the Constitution.

The Court has not yet made a decision, but its ruling could significantly impact immigration law and redefine the boundaries of executive power and constitutional protections for U.S.-born children.