On June 30, 2026, the Supreme Court released its decision in Trump v. Barbara, 609 U.S. ____ (2026). The Court ruled 6-3 to strike down President Trump's January 2025 Executive Order which sought to end birthright citizenship. Birthright citizenship has been a longstanding practice in the United States with only children of diplomats, foreign ministers, and historic sovereign tribes being exempt.  

Under the Executive Order, anyone born in the United States to parents who were undocumented or in the United States on a temporary basis (i.e., as a visitor or a nonimmigrant worker) would not be considered to be a United States citizen. 

Legal History and Background

The Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment 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.” The case hinged on the meaning of the phrase: “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”. 

The Trump Administration argued that those born in the United States to undocumented or nonimmigrant parents were not considered to be subject to United States jurisdiction as required by the 14th Amendment. They would not be considered under the jurisdiction of the United States since, as non-lawful permanent residents or citizens, they would in theory have allegiance to a foreign country. Alternatively, the plaintiffs argued that a plain reading of the 14th Amendment implied use of the common definition of the word “jurisdiction” – anyone on United States soil is considered to be under the jurisdiction of United States law. That would mean that anyone born in the United States is subject to the country's laws and, therefore, its jurisdiction. 

________________

Historically, English common law used the principle of jus soli - the idea that being born on the soil of one country was enough to make the child a citizen of that country. This concept came to the Thirteen Colonies and continued to be recognized once the United States became a sovereign nation. 

The Supreme Court departed from this common law practice in 1857 with Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856). In Dred Scott, the Supreme Court held that anyone descended from slaves could not be a United States citizen – even if they had been born on United States soil. Dred Scott remained a legal precedent until the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which made nearly all persons born in the United States a citizen. Birthright citizenship was later added to the Constitution with the 14th Amendment as ratified in 1868. 

Birthright citizenship was then reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). Wong Kim Ark was a United States citizen born to Chinese citizen parents in California. He returned to China to visit his parents as an adult and, upon his return, was denied admission on the basis that he was not a United States citizen. The Supreme Court held that - because he was born to parents who were not employed in any official or diplomatic capacity by the Chinese emperor – Wong Kim Ark was born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States in accordance with the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment. He was therefore a United States citizen and could not be denied entry.  

What does this decision mean for you? 

For now, any and all babies born in the United States will continue to become citizens at the time of their birth on American soil regardless of their parents' status.

However, there may still be some uncertainty that lies ahead for birthright citizenship. Justice Kavanaugh wrote in his opinion that he considered the Executive Order invalid not because it violated the Constitution but rather because it violated a federal law providing that children who are “born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” are U.S. citizens. In his view, Congress could amend that law and then the Executive Order would be valid. Any changes will depend on whether there is enough support in Congress to change the federal law. 

________________

Contact the Law Offices of James D. Eiss today if you have any questions pertaining to United States citizenship.