Supreme Court blocks Trump's bid to end birthright citizenship for children of immigrants

The US Supreme Court has ruled against a Trump-era executive order aiming to deny citizenship to children born in the country to unauthorised or temporary visa-holding parents. The 6-3 decision was written by Chief Justice John Roberts. It reaffirms the long-standing legal principle of birthright citizenship. The case centres on the Fourteenth Amendment, which defines citizenship broadly. It has been interpreted for 160 years to grant automatic citizenship to nearly all children born in the US, with very limited exceptions. This understanding was solidified by the 1898 Supreme Court case Wong Kim Ark, which confirmed birthright citizenship regardless of parents' immigration status.

Even during times of strong anti-immigrant sentiment, such as World War II, the principle held firm. Japanese citizens' newborn children in US detention camps were automatically recognised as American citizens. Congress later codified this legal interpretation, reinforcing its place in US law.

Every lower court judge who reviewed Trump’s executive order called it 'blatantly unconstitutional'. At the Supreme Court, ACLU lawyer Cecillia Wang—herself a birthright citizen—argued that children should not be punished for their parents’ actions. The court’s ruling aligns with this view, rejecting Trump’s claim that the Fourteenth Amendment applied only to former slaves. The decision blocks the executive order and upholds birthright citizenship as a fundamental legal right. It confirms that the Fourteenth Amendment’s broad definition remains unchanged. The ruling ensures that children born in the US continue to receive citizenship at birth, regardless of their parents’ immigration status.