Reason.com
Supreme Court Rules Against Trump in the Birthright Citizenship Case
The 6-3 decision is right, and a contrary ruling would have had horrific effects.
Center Right
The Dispatch
Fact Checking Trump’s Claims About the Strait of Hormuz
Center Right
The president claimed that an ‘all time RECORD’ amount of oil exited the strait on June 22.
Compare Perspectives
Found 8 stories
RealClearPolitics - Homepage
What SCOTUS Election Ruling Means for Trump's Tantrums
Republicans lost a bid to throw out Mississippi's three-day grace period for absentee ballots, but the president is still itching for a fight.
Center Right
Washington Examiner
Trump pivots to Congress for birthright citizenship overhaul after Supreme Court rejection
President Donald Trump on Tuesday called on Congress to limit birthright citizenship after the Supreme Court issued a ruling rejecting his push to overhaul the policy. Trump’s position puts him at odds with several leading lawmakers in the Republican Party, who called for a constitutional amendment to limit birthright citizenship after the justices handed down […]
Center Right
WorldNetDaily
‘Start TODAY’: Trump reacts to Supreme ruling on birthright citizenship with ‘easy’ solution
'No long and unwieldy Constitutional Amendment is necessary!'
Far Right
Washington Examiner
Trump celebrates transgender athlete ban and campaign spending Supreme Court rulings
President Donald Trump celebrated two Supreme Court rulings on Tuesday that upheld state laws barring biological males from competing in women’s sports and struck down restrictions on coordinated campaign spending between political parties and candidates, calling the decisions major victories. The court issued a 6-3 decision upholding Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act and West […]
Center Right
Alternet.org
GOP speaker floats amending Constitution after Supreme Court hands Trump devastating loss
Speaker Mike Johnson was in the middle of a news conference when the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision on President Donald Trump's executive order eliminating the constitutional right to birthright citizenship. Johnson grumbled audibly and said he was “very disappointed” with the ruling, though he conceded it was a "textualist, originalist view" by the Court since it's plainly enshrined in the 14th Amendment. However, he said that it's time to amend the U.S. Constitution to end birthright citizenship because it has been "grossly abused in recent years.""We have, you know — it's become a tourism — birthing tourism, they call, you know, a trend where people will just come and you just come onto the soil and have your child and then they're able to avail themselves of the welfare state and everything else. It's been abused," said Johnson. A study by the Immigration Policy Institute using data from the U.S. Census showed that approximately 0.7 percent of births in the U.S. "could be attributed to birth tourism." They aren't certain whether or not they are, but that is the maximum amount it could be"And so I'm sure that we'll continue to look at that," Johnson continued. "I mean they I'm sure the conclusion from this opinion is going to be that you got to amend the Constitution to fix that. As we all know, it's a big challenge to amend the Constitution. It's only happened 27 times in our whole nation's history. And the reason is because you got to have two-thirds of the both chambers of Congress and three-fourths of the states to ratify. It's usually, you know, at least a many-year-long process and very complicated. Um we'll see."He closed by saying that "we'll have to deal with it as a Congress." Johnson has failed to pass much legislation since taking over as Speaker of the House. In 2025, the House set a record for the fewest votes and fewest bills passed in recent years, the New York Times reported. Republicans hold the majority in the House, Senate and White House.
Left
Axios
SCOTUS rejects Trump's birthright citizenship policy
The Supreme Court struck down President Trump's executive order restricting birthright citizenship on Tuesday, reaffirming the long-held belief that any person born on American soil is a citizen.Why it matters: The decision is a blow to Trump, who sought to limit by executive fiat who is eligible for American citizenship as part of his widespread immigration crackdown.What they're saying: "Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights— to freely participate in our political community," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the five-justice majority."Children born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily present are 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States and are citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause."Yes, but: In a dissenting opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas said "[b]oth the Civil Rights Act and the Citizenship Clause guaranteed citizenship to persons born and domiciled in the United States regardless of their race.""Because many potential applications of the President's Order are consistent with the original public meaning of the Citizenship Clause, I respectfully dissent."Threat level: If the administration had succeeded in its arguments, millions of babies would no longer be eligible for citizenship, losing their rights to work authorization, safety net provisions, voting and more.Some of those children could have become stateless with no guaranteed rights at all if their parents' home countries refused to grant them citizenship. Prior to the decision, Trump had lambasted Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett — both of whom he had appointed — on Truth Social, anticipating that they would vote against him on birthright citizenship."I don't want loyalty, but I do want and expect it for our Country," he said.Catch up quick: Trump's order sought to limit birthright citizenship to people who have at least one legally present parent in the U.S.The order was based on a once-fringe position that the 14th Amendment doesn't expand to those present in America illegally because they aren't "subject to the jurisdiction" of America, as required in the amendment.The majority of the justices appeared skeptical of the Trump administration's arguments during the case's initial oral arguments, including Roberts.Zoom in: Two of Trump's three appointees sided, at least in part, with the president.Justice Brett Kavanaugh concurred with the judgment but disagreed with the court's reasoning, arguing that Trump's executive order violated a separate immigration statute. Thomas was joined by Gorsuch, who wrote that "By definition, temporary visitors to this country do not choose to make a permanent home here, and their children thus cannot claim the privilege of citizenship.""Because the executive order is lawful at least to this extent, respondents' facial challenge must fail."By the numbers: Two-thirds of Americans support preserving the 14th Amendment's right to birthright citizenship.That includes the majority of Independents and many Republicans.Roughly 53% of Trump's most religious voting block — white evangelical Protestants — say they support the constitutionally guaranteed right.Go deeper: What's at risk if SCOTUS sides with Trump in birthright citizenship caseEditor's note: This story was updated with additional information and context throughout.
Center Left
Raw Story
Hell and fury narrowly avoided as Supreme Court says no to Trump
For one day, at least, the Constitution held, and in the chaotic and disjointed time we are living in, and where we hold our breath awaiting the rulings of an overtly bigoted Supreme Court, that is saying an awful lot.The court today struck down President Donald Trump's executive order attempting to strip birthright citizenship from children born on U.S. soil to undocumented or non-permanent-resident parents. In doing so, it reaffirmed one of the oldest and most sacred guarantees in American life: if you are born here, you are an American. No exceptions for the status of your parents, no second-class tier of citizenship invented by a president acting alone. It is a relief, and it should not have been in doubt, and because it was, it was an example of how far our open democracy has closed up.What we have retained today is an America where hundreds of thousands of U.S.-born children are instantly granted automatic citizenship, securely integrated into their communities with full social services, education, and employment rights, and where their families achieve permanent status without facing the threat of arbitrary deportation.We have avoided a system where birth certificates require complex parental status checks and state health departments are forced to act as immigration enforcers. It would have created a disenfranchised subclass.In other words, if SCOTUS had acquiesced to Trump, all hell and fury would have broken loose, and the 14th Amendment shredded to pieces.The 14th Amendment wasn't an accident or a loophole or an afterthought. It was written in the wake of the Civil War, specifically to overturn Dred Scott and guarantee, in plain language, that anyone born here belonged here, regardless of what their parents had been forced to endure, regardless of where their bloodline started.For a century and a half, that promise has held. The Supreme Court itself affirmed it in 1898 in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, ruling that a man born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrant parents, parents who could not even become citizens themselves under the racist laws of the era, was as American as anyone else in this country by virtue of his birth alone.Today's ruling holds that line. A child's legal status belongs to them alone, entirely free from the politics, status, or actions of their parents. A baby born in a Texas hospital is an American citizen by right, not by the permission of whoever happens to occupy the White House or a court that is chock-full of narrow-minded conservatives.Trump’s executive order was so bad that in early 2025, U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour in Seattle blocked the policy, slamming it as "blatantly unconstitutional." The Reagan-appointed judge used scathing language, stating that in his four decades on the bench, he had never seen such a clear violation of law. Rebuking the executive overreach, Coughenour declared, "to our president the rule of law is but an impediment to his policy goals," warning that history judges harshly when the legal system fails to stand up to unlawful actions.The children of immigrants, including immigrants who arrived undocumented or with nothing but hope, have become some of the people who define what America is. They have shaped and bolstered our economy.This country's culture, science, economy and even its politics were built in no small part by Americans whose parents came here without papers, without money, and without permission, and whose children were citizens anyway because the Constitution said so.Today's ruling means that story continues. It means the next generation of doctors, engineers, athletes, and artists born in this country will still get to claim it as their own by right of birth, the same as every generation before them.The ruling is also a reminder that the Constitution cannot be rewritten by executive order, no matter how forcefully Trump and his ill-advised ilk wishes it could. It confirms what that judge in Seattle, and really what a century and a half of precedent had already found, that the 14th Amendment means what it says, and no president gets to amend it unilaterally.That matters beyond this single case. It comes against the backdrop of an administration and a Supreme Court that has also moved to strip Temporary Protected Status from Haitian and Syrian nationals and taken a death-knell posture toward asylum seekers at the southern border. Today's ruling doesn't undo those horrific policies, but it draws a clear line the administration cannot cross, explicitly saying that birthright citizenship is no one’s to revoke.The fight over who belongs in this country is far from over, and this ruling will not be the last word on immigration policy under this administration. In all probability, this ruling today might be a one-off, and that’s the tragedy of it all.But for today, the Constitution's plainest, oldest promise to the children born on this soil remains intact.
Far Left