Understanding the Supreme Court’s Birthright Citizenship Ruling

by arya germanwala, Intern

The Trump administration recently received a significant victory in its efforts to halt birthright citizenship, a protection guaranteed by the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. On June 27, the Supreme Court ruled that federal district courts lack the authority to issue nationwide injunctions—the ability of a federal trial judge to freeze a policy across the entire nation pending adjudication of its merits. Nationwide injunctions ensure that a court's decision to stall the implementation of a policy applies to all individuals in the United States, not just the plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit. Without these protections, the Executive Order ending birthright citizenship for thousands of U.S.-born children is no longer enjoined nationwide, leaving many states vulnerable to this administration’s immigration initiative.

The Backstory

In January 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order challenging the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment. The order stated that birthright citizenship would be limited to children born to at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident. Currently, the Constitution states that all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. are citizens of the U.S., regardless of the parents’ legal status. This protection dates back to the post-Civil War era, when Congress ratified the 14th Amendment to ensure citizenship status and equal protections for formerly enslaved Black individuals. However, in passing this Executive Order, Trump claims this birthright citizenship protection was only "meant for babies of slaves" years ago, while also asserting that its current interpretation has led to millions of unlawful immigrants entering the country.

In response to the Executive Order, immigrant rights organizations, individual plaintiffs, and 22 states sued the federal government in the case known as Trump v. CASA, Inc., arguing that the executive branch violated constitutional protections and the Immigration and Nationality Act. Three federal judges from different districts also agreed that Trump's executive order violated Constitutional rights, leading to the issuing of nationwide injunctions to block the order. The Trump administration then requested a 30-day partial stay (or pause) of the injunctions, which has now been granted. As Trump's executive order cannot go into effect until July 27, lower courts and parties are currently determining potential next steps.  

Impact of this Ruling

It's important to recognize that this ruling did not address the constitutionality of birthright citizenship and, therefore, does not directly uphold President Trump's executive order. However, the pausing of national injunctions has expanded the executive branch’s power in shaping immigration policy. This ruling may create a scenario where access to a fundamental constitutional right can vary greatly from state to state, resulting in a fractured policy framework across the nation. Several states that did not join the lawsuit, including Tennessee, could strip children of their birthright citizenship and the safeguards that come along with it, such as access to essential government programs. 

This ruling is already impacting families in certain states. An NBC News story shared the stories of two pregnant women, Trinidad and Monica, who are Venezuelan asylum seekers and plaintiffs in the lawsuit challenging Trump's executive order. Monica, residing in South Carolina, may face a different future outcome than Trinidad, who resides in North Carolina. As she approaches her final months of pregnancy, she anxiously awaits a final decision.. Other stories that have been reported echo this terrifying experience.

Women who are not plaintiffs in the current lawsuit face even greater risk. The Tahirih Justice Center, a nonprofit organization that offers legal assistance to immigrant women, is assisting a pregnant Latin American immigrant who is waiting to obtain legal status. The center reports that if the woman does not receive a notice of the decision soon, her child will likely not be considered a U.S. citizen upon birth. Due to the often drawn-out nature of the U.S. immigration process, many families could be just steps away from ensuring their unborn child has birthright citizenship, whether or not the Executive Order stands, but now find themselves facing an overwhelming amount of uncertainty. If a child is born and denied citizenship under Trump’s Executive Order, they may be left stateless, meaning they will not be recognized as a citizen of any country. 

This court ruling leaves many of the substantive questions unanswered. Will children born to undocumented immigrants in certain states be denied a fundamental constitutional right? Will this policy be another legal avenue for the administration's mass deportation agenda? This policy sends a troubling message about the integrity of American ideals by attempting to undermine a basic right and source of belonging for children. As July 27 approaches, the administration's policy agenda moves forward, while the fears of families across the country continue to expand.

New Hampshire’s Block of Trump's Executive Order

In response to the Supreme Court’s ruling, the ACLU filed a class action lawsuit against Trump’s executive order. The lawsuit was brought on behalf of pregnant women and immigrant parents who sought class action status for all children that would be impacted by this executive order. On July 10, these plaintiffs received a significant victory: a federal judge in New Hampshire certified this nationwide class and enjoined enforcement of the Executive Order against them, effectively blocking the Executive Order and restoring the nationwide ban without use of a nationwide injunction. Two additional rulings blocking the birthright order nationwide have since been issued after the Supreme Court decision.

White House spokesman Harrison Fields stated that the administration “will be fighting vigorously against the attempts of these rogue district court judges to impede the policies President Trump was elected to implement.” While citizenship is protected for now, the future legal landscape remains uncertain.