President Donald Trump's effort to rewrite one of America's longest-standing citizenship principles has been halted after the US Supreme Court ruled that children born on American soil remain entitled to citizenship under the Constitution.
The 6-3 ruling delivers a major setback to Trump's immigration agenda and preserves a constitutional protection that has existed for more than 150 years. The decision means babies born in the United States will continue to receive automatic citizenship regardless of whether their parents are undocumented migrants or holders of temporary visas.
The legal dispute stemmed from an executive order Trump signed on his first day after returning to the White House for a second term. The order sought to stop automatic citizenship from applying to children whose parents were either living in the country illegally or staying temporarily.
At the heart of the case was the interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, which has long been viewed as the constitutional foundation of birthright citizenship in the United States.
Opponents of the order maintained that the amendment clearly guarantees citizenship to anyone born in the country, arguing that the president's directive directly conflicted with constitutional protections.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court agreed with that position.
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, pointed to the amendment's wording, stating: “All persons born or naturalised in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States”.
Trump's legal team had argued that undocumented migrants were not fully under US jurisdiction and therefore their children should not automatically qualify for citizenship.
The court's majority rejected that interpretation, finding that the Constitution leaves no basis for excluding children born in the United States from citizenship on those grounds.
The decision effectively shuts down Trump's attempt to end birthright citizenship through executive action. With the court concluding that the Constitution clearly protects the right, reversing the ruling would require changing the Constitution itself.
Such a move would face enormous hurdles. Constitutional amendments are rare in the United States and have been adopted only 27 times since the country's founding.
Trump had taken an unusually active role in the case. In April, he attended oral arguments before the Supreme Court and watched as Solicitor General D. John Sauer defended the administration's position before the justices.
His appearance attracted criticism from opponents, who viewed it as an effort to influence a case carrying major political and legal consequences.
During the hearing, Sauer's arguments faced sustained questioning from members of the court, signalling that several justices were unconvinced by the administration's justification for ending birthright citizenship.
After the proceedings, Trump publicly criticised judges who had ruled against him despite being appointed by him, calling them “stupid people.”
By the time the ruling was delivered, the president had not issued a public response. The judgment now leaves one of the most ambitious immigration measures of his second term without a path forward through executive authority.