06 Dec 2025 Supreme Court Agrees To Hear Case On Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order
When Trump took office in January 2025, he immediately signed an executive order restricting the birthright citizenship of children born in the U.S. Under that Executive Order, a child born after February 2025 would be considered a U.S. citizen at birth only if at least one parent was either a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident. As a result, children born to parents who were out of status or in the U.S. on temporary, non-immigrant visas (such as visitors, students, temporary workers, etc.) would not be U.S. citizens at birth.
Almost immediately, there were legal challenges, stays, and injunctions, blocking the enforcement of that Executive Order. Now, the U.S. Supreme Court has decided to take up the case and decide the constitutionality of Trump’s Executive Order and whether the 14th Amendment provides for U.S. citizenship to children born in the U.S. to parents who were not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents but instead were out of status or non-immigrants. A decision is expected by June 2026.
First, I want to emphasize that the Executive Order would apply only to children born 30 days AFTER that Executive Order and not to children born before that time. I know that many parents who are out of status have been patiently and eagerly waiting for their U.S. citizen child to reach 21 so the child can petition them. Now, the parent is worried if the child will be stripped of citizenship. That is not the case! Relax. If your child was born before the effective date of the Executive Order (February 2025), that child will remain a U.S. citizen regardless of how the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately rules.
In this article, I will explain the background, history, and issues involved in this very important controversy.
The 14th Amendment, which was enacted right after the Civil War, states:
“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.”
Trump argues that the 14th Amendment was intended to extend citizenship only to the children of formerly enslaved people and has been wrongly interpreted to apply to children of illegal aliens and nonimmigrants. Trump further argues that the 14th Amendment grants birthright citizenship to children born in the U.S. only if the parents are “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
While historically this phrase was interpreted to refer to children of diplomats (who are not subject to U.S. jurisdiction), Trump argues that people out of status or on non-immigrant visas are also not subject to U.S. jurisdiction. Therefore, the 14th Amendment birthright citizenship does not apply to their children.
There is an 1898 Supreme Court case, Wong Kim Ark, that people cite to challenge Trump’s interpretation of the 14th Amendment. In that case, a person born in the U.S. to Chinese parents (not parents who were former slaves) was considered a U.S. citizen at birth under the 14th Amendment. Therefore, the 14th Amendment does not apply just to children of former slaves, and people argue that this 1898 case has already resolved the issue.
However, that Supreme Court case emphasized the fact that the Chinese parents were long-time residents or permanent residents, which is part of Trump’s executive order (where children of lawful permanent residents are considered U.S. citizens at birth), such that his executive order is in conformance with that 1898 case. Therefore, the issue and the arguments are not clear-cut.
Furthermore, just because the Supreme Court has decided an issue one way does not mean they will not overrule or overturn an old case. For example, they overruled Roe vs Wade on abortion and overruled another long-standing case that promoted “separate but equal” facilities and treatment of Blacks and whites and racial segregation, which was fortunately overturned in Brown vs. Board of Education.
This is a fascinating case with far-reaching implications that could affect our country for decades to come, in that it would redefine who is a U.S. citizen, effectively halting birthright citizenship, unless the child’s parent was a U.S. citizen or green card holder when they were born.
I will continue monitoring and reporting to you on developments on this and other important immigration issues.
WEBSITE: www.gurfinkel.com
Follow us on Facebook.com/GurfinkelLaw, YouTube: US Immigration TV and Instagram.com/gurfinkellaw
Four offices to serve you: LOS ANGELES; SAN FRANCISCO; NEW YORK:
TOLL FREE NUMBER: 1-866-GURFINKEL (1-866-487-3465)
PHILIPPINES: +632 8894-0258 or +632 8894-023