The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck down an executive order from President Donald Trump that directed federal agencies to only recognize babies born to people in the country legally as American citizens.
Chief Justice John Roberts penned the opinion, with Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Amy Coney Barrett joining him in the majority.
Brett Kavanaugh partially concurred with the majority opinion, but disagreed that Trump’s order violated the 14th Amendment.
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch dissented.
On his first day in office, Trump issued an executive order banning birthright citizenship, which would have the effect of ensuring that the children of illegal immigrants who are born in the United States are not automatically granted American citizenship.
Trump, who attended the oral arguments in the case when it went before the court, has campaigned hard for his position.
“The United States of America cannot live with the shackles of Birthright Citizenship. It is not economically, or otherwise, sustainable, and no other Country in the World, of consequence, does it!” Trump posted earlier this month on Truth Social.
Do you think the Supreme Court got this one right?
The order suffered multiple court defeats on its path to the Supreme Court, but Trump has continued to appeal the rulings.
Fears that the ruling would not go Trump’s way sparked after, during oral arguments on the case, Chief Justice John Roberts pushed back against Solicitor General John Sauer, who made the president’s argument.
Specifically, Roberts sounded skeptical that the Fourteenth Amendment, on which birthright citizenship rests, excludes children of illegal immigrants.
“Based on Chinese media reports,” Sauer said in a clip posted on X, “there are 500 — 500 — birth-tourism companies in the People’s Republic of China, whose business is to bring people here to give birth and return to that nation.”
“Having said all that,” Roberts replied, “you do agree that that has no impact on the legal analysis before us?”
Sauer did not agree. Instead, he respectfully cited the late Justice Antonin Scalia in arguing that 19th-century Americans did not foresee such things. In other words, the people who wrote the Fourteenth Amendment did not intend it for the children of illegal immigrants.
“Well, it certainly wasn’t a problem in the 19th century,” Roberts responded.
“No,” Sauer replied, “but of course, we’re in a new world now, as Justice [Samuel] Alito pointed out, where eight billion people are one plane ride away from having a child who’s a U.S. citizen.”
“Well, it’s a new world,” Roberts conceded, “[but] it’s the same Constitution.”
In February, Trump predicted he would not win the case.
“[T]his supreme court will find a way to come to the wrong conclusion,” Trump declared in a social media post.
Another February Truth Social post excoriating the court noted, “The next thing you know they will rule in favor of China and others, who are making an absolute fortune on Birthright Citizenship, by saying the 14th Amendment was NOT written to take care of the “babies of slaves,” which it was as proven by the EXACT TIMING of its construction, filing, and ratification, which perfectly coincided with the END OF THE CIVIL WAR.”
“How much better can you do than that? But this supreme court will find a way to come to the wrong conclusion, one that again will make China, and various other Nations, happy and rich. Let our supreme court keep making decisions that are so bad and deleterious to the future of our Nation – I have a job to do,” Trump posted.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
