Supreme Court Considers Trump Birthright Citizenship Order With Oregon Officials Opposing the Move

After legal arguments were heard by the Supreme Court Justices yesterday in Trump v. Barbara- a challenge to President Trump’s executive order seeking to redefine who is an American citizen at birth, the Oregon Attorney General issued a statement that said:

“The president does not get to rewrite the Constitution by executive order. We are confident the Court will agree.”

Supreme Court Hears Legal Arguments Over Trump’s Birthright Executive Order

According to new Research, while births to undocumented parents have declined significantly over the last two decades, they currently represent about 7% to 8% of all annual U.S. births.

Yesterday, the Supreme Court listened to oral arguments regarding President Trump’s January 2025 executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship for children of temporary visa holders and undocumented immigrants.

Several lower courts have ruled that the order is “blatantly unconstitutional. The legal battle centers on the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause granting citizenship to those born in the U.S. and who are “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer, on behalf of Trump, who briefly attended the hearing, argued that the clause was intended for formerly enslaved people and that “birth tourism” justifies a narrower modern interpretation.

However, the liberal justices and several conservatives expressed deep skepticism.

Key points from the hearing included:

Precedent: Most justices leaned on Wong Kim Ark (1898), which established that birthright citizenship applies regardless of race or the parents’ citizenship status.

Constitutional Rigidity: Chief Justice Roberts rebuffed the idea that modern “birth tourism” changes the law. He said that while we have a “new world,” we have the “same Constitution.”

Statutory Grounds: Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh suggested the order might also violate the Immigration and Nationality Act, potentially allowing the court to strike down the policy without a broad constitutional ruling.

The high court appears poised to side against the administration. AG Rayfield confirmed that the Fourteenth Amendment is not ambiguous and has guaranteed birthright citizenship for more than 150 years. He quoted the federal appeals court, which recently said:

This fundamental ‘question may explain why it has been more than a century since a branch of our government has made as concerted an effort as the Executive Branch now makes to deny Americans their birthright.’

A final decision is expected by early summer 2026.