The nation’s highest court on Tuesday ruled that the children of people illegally or temporarily present in the United States are American citizens at birth. Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, said that such children clearly fall under the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which says anyone “born … in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is a citizen.
Previous court precedent included only very narrow exceptions to birthright citizenship, such as for the children of ambassadors, he wrote. The precedent also indicated that any private individual within the United States was subject to its jurisdiction, he wrote.
The case stemmed from President Donald Trump’s January 2025 executive order stating that automatic citizenship is not conferred to U.S.-born children whose parents are both illegal immigrants or temporary U.S. residents. Several federal judges blocked the order from taking effect as various challenges to it worked their way through the courts.
Which justices disagreed with the decision? Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Samuel Alito filed dissenting opinions, while Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote that he agreed with the end result but not the full majority opinion. Alito referred to the ruling as a serious mistake that grants citizenship to children born to parents who came to the United States solely for so-called “birth tourism.” He argued that, understood in proper context, the 14th Amendment’s citizenship statement referred only to people who did not have allegiance to a foreign power.
How did Trump react to the ruling? The president said the ruling was bad for America. However, the justices’ legal analysis showed that Congress could make a law to change birthright citizenship, without the need for a constitutional amendment, he said. He urged lawmakers to prioritize drafting such a law.
This story originally appeared in WORLD. © 2026, reprinted with permission. All rights reserved.
