The U.S. Supreme Court is preparing to hear a major case this Thursday that could shape the future of birthright citizenship in America. The case revolves around former President Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at ending automatic citizenship for children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants or those on temporary visas.
This is the first time the justices will officially hear oral arguments on a policy from Trump’s second-term agenda. While the Court has already responded to emergency appeals from the Trump administration over blocked policies, this case marks a significant moment.
The policy in question challenges the long-standing interpretation of the 14th Amendment, which since 1868 has guaranteed U.S. citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States.” For over a century, this clause has been understood to include nearly everyone born on U.S. soil—except for children of foreign diplomats.
Trump’s executive order, signed on Inauguration Day, argues that this right should only apply to children whose parents are either U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. If enacted, the policy could affect around 255,000 babies born each year, according to the Migration Policy Institute.
Supporters of the order claim the original intent of the 14th Amendment was to give citizenship to formerly enslaved people—not to allow undocumented immigrants to gain a foothold in the U.S. by having children here. They argue that undocumented immigrants are not truly “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, meaning their children shouldn’t automatically be granted citizenship.
On the other side, critics—including states with Democratic leadership and immigration advocacy groups—say the order is unconstitutional. Federal judges in Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington state agreed and quickly blocked the policy from being enforced nationwide.
The Supreme Court isn’t expected to make a final ruling on the issue just yet since the case is still in its early stages. However, the justices’ questions and opinions during the hearing may offer insight into how they’re thinking—and whether they’re open to reinterpreting a key part of the Constitution.
Another big issue at play is how federal judges use nationwide injunctions. The Trump administration is asking the Court to rein in the power of lower courts to block federal policies across the entire country. It’s a legal debate that has frustrated presidents from both parties over the years.
Trump has long floated the idea of ending birthright citizenship, even saying in 2018 that he didn’t believe a constitutional amendment was necessary to make the change—just an executive order. Now, the question of whether that’s possible is in the hands of the highest court in the land.
While the justices’ final decision may take time, this case could have wide-reaching implications for immigration, citizenship, and presidential authority in the years to come.