In a historic ruling, the US Supreme Court has struck down a Trump administration executive order targeting birthright citizenship, preserving what it means to be born an American.
The court ruled 6-3 in Trump vs Barbara on Tuesday, holding that children born in the United States to undocumented parents or parents on temporary visas are entitled to US citizenship.
While undocumented immigration has long been central to the debate about birthright citizenship, so-called birth tourism has become an increasing focus in some political and policy arguments, with some allegations made against China.
Echoing accusations of proponents of his executive order, US President Donald Trump took aim at China in a social media post after the decision was announced.
“I would like to congratulate President Xi, and the Great Country of China, on their massive Birthright Citizenship WIN! President DONALD J. TRUMP,” Trump wrote.
Restricting birthright citizenship has been a cornerstone of Trump’s second term agenda, which saw him sign an executive order in early 2025 to end citizenship for children of undocumented parents or temporary visa holders.
The policy was scheduled to take effect the following month, but was repeatedly blocked in federal courts before it headed to the Supreme Court.
In another social media post, Trump called the Supreme Court’s decision “too bad” for the country, while claiming “we can easily make it up in Congress through Legislation” and that “no long and unwieldy Constitutional Amendment is necessary”.
“Congress should start TODAY to work on ending expensive and unfair to our Country, Birthright Citizenship. They will have my Complete and Total Support!”
While much of the birthright citizenship rhetoric has been about unlawful immigration, the Trump administration’s order actually targeted those who are lawfully present in the US and on the path to permanent legal status.
This included people on highly skilled work visas such as H-1B and L-1, as well as dependent visas, student visas, temporary labour visas, and achievement visas, which are all considered “lawful but temporary” by the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).
If one parent is a citizen, the child would still have been granted birthright citizenship under the order.
The legal history of birthright citizenship in the US was key to Tuesday’s decision, as arguments on both sides in 2026 examined the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause.
“Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights – to freely participate in our political community. The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land’,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “We keep that promise today.”
The clause has long been understood to grant citizenship to nearly all children born in the US, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. It was passed in 1866, just after the Civil War, and ratified in 1868, to safeguard the rights of former slaves and other minorities.
However, modern-day birthright citizenship stems from a landmark 1898 case involving a Chinese national. In United States vs Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court ruled that a man born in San Francisco to Chinese parents was a US citizen under the 14th Amendment.
Wong had been denied re-entry to the United States after a trip to China, with officials arguing he was not a citizen under the Chinese Exclusion Act because of his parents’ immigration status.
The landmark ruling established that nearly all persons born on US soil are citizens, regardless of their parents’ nationality.
Following Tuesday’s decision, Wong Kim Ark’s descendants commended the ruling in a statement, with Norman Wong saying his great-grandfather never set out to become a symbol.
“He was one man, only a cook, and yet he stood up for what was right, and I believe that it has made a difference,” Wong said. “As a result, he stood up for the rights of all of us Americans – it just so happens that I am related to him. Today’s ruling shows that his victory remains as important now as it was in 1898.”
Birthright citizenship survived the Chinese Exclusion Act and Jim Crow, said Krish O’Mara Vignarajah, president of Global Refuge, a non-profit organisation that works with refugees, and added that today, it survived an executive order that would have “essentially turned the maternity ward into a customs checkpoint”.
Meanwhile, Stop AAPI Hate noted that the ruling carries special significance for Asian-American communities while citing Wong Kim Ark’s case.
“Birthright citizenship has shaped America into the uniquely diverse and democratic nation it is today,” the organisation said in a statement.
“Because of this right, the Asian-American community and other communities of colour have been able to grow in size and political power – and that is precisely why the Trump administration attempted to end it.”
