President Donald Trumps push to end birthright citizenship hit a major turning point with the Supreme Courts 6-3 ruling on June 27, limiting judges power to block his policies nationwide. This decision could reshape United States citizenship laws, creating uncertainty for families. Here’s what the ruling means, why it’s sparking debate, and what’s next for this contentious policy.
Supreme Court Hands Trump a Win
On June 27, the Supreme Court ruled to curb nationwide injunctions, allowing President Trumps executive order on birthright citizenship to take effect in 28 states within 30 days.
Signed on his first day back in office, January 20, 2025, the order denies citizenship to US-born children of undocumented or temporary-status parents, challenging the 14th Amendment’s guarantee. The ruling, penned by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, doesn’t address the order’s legality but limits judges from issuing blanket blocks, a win for Trumps agenda.
A Patchwork of Citizenship Rules
The decision creates a chaotic scenario where citizenship could vary by state. In 22 states like California and New Jersey, which sued to block the order, birthright citizenship remains intact for now. But in states like Texas or Florida, which didn’t challenge it, babies born after July 27, 2025, could be denied passports and benefits.
New Jersey’s solicitor general, Jeremy Feigenbaum, warned of “chaos on the ground” if citizenship flips across state lines—imagine a child born in Wyoming losing citizenship but gaining it by moving to Colorado. I’ve seen families grapple with immigration red tape before; this could make navigating benefits or school enrollment a nightmare.
Why It’s Controversial
Trumps order, rooted in a fringe interpretation pushed by scholars like John Eastman, claims the 14th Amendment’s “subject to the jurisdiction” clause excludes children of non-legal residents. This contradicts the 1898 Wong Kim Ark ruling, which cemented birthright citizenship for nearly all US-born children.
Critics, including Justice Sonia Sotomayor in her dissent, call the order “patently unconstitutional”, warning it threatens the rule of law. Immigrant rights groups, like the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, voiced despair, with plaintiff “Liza” vowing to keep fighting. Meanwhile, Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi hailed the ruling as a “monumental victory” for enforcing his immigration crackdown.
What’s Next for the Fight
The battle is far from over. The Supreme Court left open a path for class-action lawsuits, and groups like the ACLU and CASA de Maryland filed new challenges on June 27 to protect affected children nationwide. California AG Rob Bonta expressed confidence in securing a broader injunction, citing lower court rulings against Trumps order.
For now, the policy’s fate hinges on these lawsuits, with a potential Supreme Court showdown in October 2025. Reporters spoke with a local activist who’s organizing rallies to keep pressure on—families are scared but determined to fight back.