The U.S. Supreme Court rejected an executive order by President Donald Trump that sought to end birthright citizenship in a six-three decision [1].
The ruling preserves a fundamental pillar of American immigration law by reaffirming that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to virtually everyone born on U.S. soil [1].
Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said that the president lacks the authority to alter the constitutional definition of citizenship [2]. The court found that the executive order conflicted with the protections afforded by the Fourteenth Amendment [2]. The decision was issued on June 26, 2024 [2].
Three justices dissented from the ruling [1]. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch were the members of the court who disagreed with the majority's conclusion [1].
President Trump responded to the decision with contrasting messages. In a post on Truth Social, he said, "We must bring legislation without delay" [3]. He also said the situation was a "giant win for the American people" [4].
The ruling marks a significant legal boundary between executive power and constitutional mandates. By blocking the order, the court prevents the administration from unilaterally redefining who is considered a citizen at birth, a practice that has existed for generations.
“The court held that the President lacks authority to alter the constitutional definition of citizenship.”
This decision reinforces the principle of jus soli, or right of the soil, ensuring that citizenship is determined by geography rather than parental status. While the ruling blocks an executive action, President Trump's call for legislation suggests the administration may attempt to change birthright citizenship through a constitutional amendment or new federal laws, which would require congressional approval.
