World | Europe
The Birthright Citizenship Supreme Court Case Is Reshaping What America Means
The Supreme Court is hearing arguments on Trump's birthright citizenship order. Here is what the Fourteenth Amendment says, what the case turns on, and what a ruling could change.
The Supreme Court is hearing arguments on Trump's birthright citizenship order. Here is what the Fourteenth Amendment says, what the case turns on, and what a ruling could change.
- The Supreme Court is hearing arguments on Trump's birthright citizenship order.
- The Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, ratified in 1868 following the Civil War, begins: 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the Unite...
- The legal dispute turns on the specific phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
The Supreme Court is hearing arguments on Trump's birthright citizenship order.
The Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, ratified in 1868 following the Civil War, begins: 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.' For 158 years, this clause has been interpreted to guarantee birthright citizenship to virtually every person born on American soil. Trump's executive order challenging this interpretation has reached the Supreme Court — and the outcome will determine whether the constitutional guarantee that has defined American citizenship for a century and a half remains intact.
The legal dispute turns on the specific phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof.' The Trump administration argues that children of undocumented immigrants or visa holders are not fully 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States in the sense the Fourteenth Amendment intended — a reading that most constitutional historians describe as inconsistent with the amendment's text, history, and purpose.
The historical context of the amendment is relevant: it was passed specifically to overrule the Supreme Court's Dred Scott decision, which had held that descendants of enslaved people could not be citizens. The drafters' intent was to create a universal birthright citizenship rule that couldn't be qualified by status distinctions — precisely the kind of status distinction the Trump executive order reinstates.
The Supreme Court's current composition — a six-three conservative supermajority — makes the outcome less predictable than the historical constitutional consensus would suggest. Several of the conservative justices have shown interest in originalist arguments about the Fourteenth Amendment's meaning that could produce a narrower reading than current doctrine, though even some conservative constitutional scholars have argued the birthright citizenship clause's meaning is clear.
For the approximately 150,000 children born in the US per year to parents without documented status, the ruling will determine whether they are American citizens or stateless persons — a determination whose humanitarian and constitutional consequences are profound.