Congress has little time to get anything done before the midterm elections. And even if it passes a birthright citizenship restriction, it has little chance of becoming law.
President Trump was hit hard by the birthright citizenship ruling.
The Supreme Court’s decision left President Trump with a divided result on birthright citizenship and suspensions for trans athletes.
WASHINGTON — House Speaker Mike Johnson claims Congressional Republicans are “looking at all angles” toward restricting birthright citizenship after the Supreme Court protected it from President Donald Trump’s order to redefine what it means to be an American.
The Louisiana Republican said in an interview on “Fox News Sunday” on July 5 that House Republicans will act quickly.
“If there is any legal amendment, we will move forward with it immediately,” Johnson said. “With a constitutional amendment, you know, it takes a little bit more time. But we have to deal with this.”
While that promise is certainly not empty, it is highly unlikely that Congress will intervene to curtail birthright citizenship in the near future.
Whatever options Johnson has, it’s a huge opportunity. Particularly in a midterm election year, Republican leaders are struggling dramatically to make the most of the little time left before November.
With Republican support in the House and Senate so narrow, lawmakers have struggled to complete the basics of legislation, let alone pass controversial legislation. There is no realistic way for a controversial constitutional amendment (which requires ratification by two-thirds of both chambers and three-quarters of the states) to pass this Congress.
Still, President Trump has added it to his list of demands for Republicans in Washington, even though the request could hinder their ability to tackle the rest of their legislative agenda.
“We don’t need a long and unwieldy constitutional amendment!” he wrote on social media on June 30. “Congress should start working today to eliminate birthright citizenship, which is costly and unfair to our country. Congress will have my full and total support!”
What did Mr. Kavanaugh say?
Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a Trump appointee, was part of the 6-3 court majority that overturned the president’s executive order on June 30.
But he was not part of the 5-4 majority that argued that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to everyone born in the United States. He wrote separately that he agreed that the order was illegal but still partially disagreed with the majority opinion.
Kavanaugh said he would rule that Trump’s order is consistent with the Constitution but violates federal law. Under Kavanaugh’s interpretation, this would mean Congress still has the power to pass new laws targeting the children Trump sought to exclude from birthright citizenship, even if Trump himself could not remove them.
“Congress could otherwise enact new legislation that would create an exception to birthright citizenship for children born illegally or temporarily in the country to aliens,” Kavanaugh wrote. “But Congress hasn’t done that yet.”
Hardline conservative lawmakers took the president’s request as a rallying cry. With essentially a one-vote difference in the House, there could be trouble among Republican allies over President Trump’s policies. Even one or two House Republicans could try to freeze the legislative agenda to push for further measures to limit birthright citizenship (this is already happening with an unrelated pro-Trump voting restriction bill).
Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), who frequently uses his political influence for his own benefit, said on the House floor that he has “no interest in funding the operations of a government that has been undermined by this Supreme Court.”
“You better fix this,” he said.
Is there a bill Congress can act on?
If House Speaker Johnson intends to pursue a companion bill, he may choose the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025.
The bill was first introduced by Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas) in January 2025 (its Senate counterpart was sponsored by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina), an ally of President Trump). It would grant citizenship to babies born on U.S. soil only if their parents are American citizens or lawful permanent residents. The bill (if passed) would not apply to previously born babies.
The controversial bill stalled in committee last year. And even if the new bill passes the House, it will need support from Democrats to survive in the Senate, where even basic legislative action has been stalled for weeks due to infighting within the Republican Party. That won’t happen.
Still, the Republican focus on birthright citizenship could eat up valuable speaking time before the midterm elections. Lawmakers are on vacation for much of August and October, leaving just one month of work left in session.
Contributors: Bart Jansen and Aysha Bagchi, USA TODAY
Zachary Schermele is USA TODAY’s Congressional Correspondent. You can email us at zschermele@usatoday.com. Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and on Bluesky at @zachschermele.bsky.social..
