Supreme Court rules whether President Trump can abolish birthright citizenship
Supreme Court to decide whether President Trump can abolish birthright citizenship for some children born in the United States
In December, when political tensions were already in the air, the Supreme Court opened the door to one of the country’s deepest and oldest questions: “Who belongs?” In a pendulum swing that once again touches on a crucial point in constitutional history, the justices announced they will assess whether President Donald Trump can limit birthright citizenship to certain children born in the United States.
The decision to accept the case echoed the story from the 19th century to today, when millions of immigrant families live with an uncertain future in mind. Courts don’t just review policies. We reconsider the very interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, one of the fundamental pillars of post-Civil War American identity.
When will birthright citizenship cases be decided? What we know about this process
The Supreme Court agreed on December 5 to hear the Trump administration’s appeal of a lower court’s ruling that ruled the Trump administration’s policies illegal. The incident is-trump vs barbara— 2026, likely to be discussed in the spring, with a final decision expected by the summer. The calendar puts the ruling at the center of the electoral cycle and amplifies its political and social impact.
The justices, who are already evaluating other pillars of President Trump’s agenda, such as trade tariffs and the power to remove heads of independent agencies, will need to define whether the phrase “subject to jurisdiction” can be reinterpreted to exclude children of undocumented parents or children who are in the country temporarily. Lower courts unanimously answered “no.” However, the final decision lies with the court.
What does President Trump’s policy propose and why did the courts block it?
The bill mandated that infants born in the United States be denied automatic citizenship if neither parent is a citizen or permanent resident. The president’s argument is that these parents are not fully “subject” to U.S. jurisdiction because of their ties to other countries.
But several federal rulings say that interpretation contradicts the text of the 14th Amendment, ignores the landmark 1898 decision that defined birthright citizenship, and conflicts with the Immigration and Nationality Act. For the court, Trump’s arguments were “coercive, novel and contrary to justice.”
The administration claims the opposite. For Attorney General John Sauer, lower courts “recognize the privileges of citizenship without legal justification.” The ACLU, which represents the plaintiffs’ families, says the policy is “cruel” and inconsistent with more than a century of jurisprudence.
What should immigrant communities know based on possible outcomes? Real-world impacts and practical steps
If the courts rule that President Trump can restrict birthright citizenship, the changes would be significant. It would be the first reinterpretation of a constitutional provision in nearly 130 years. This will impact families with U.S.-born children whose parents do not have permanent legal status, creating uncertainty regarding documentation, access to benefits, and legal protection.
But if the court rejects this policy, as all lower courts have done, birthright citizenship will remain in place. In that scenario, the family would not have to go through any additional paperwork and the discussion would be legally over…at least for now.
Resources for families until the case is decided:
- Consult with free legal aid agencies such as the ACLU, NILC, or your local immigration office.
- Save all birth and hospital documents for children born in the United States.
- Avoid immigration scams. No procedure or payment can “guarantee” citizenship during litigation.
The Supreme Court, now filled with three justices appointed by President Trump, faces a decisive opportunity to confirm its historical interpretation of civil rights or open an unprecedented path that will affect millions of people. Similar questions are growing among lawyers, parents, and civil society groups: Will this be the defining case of a new constitutional era?
Contributed by: USA TODAY
Boris Q’va is a national Spanish language trends news reporter for Connect/USA TODAY Network. You can follow him on X as @ByBorisQva or write to him at BBalsindesUrquiola@gannett.com.
