President Donald Trump has vowed to pursue legislation to end birthright citizenship after the US Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution guarantees citizenship to children born in the United States, dealing a setback to one of his key immigration policies.

Get today's headlines by email

The president said Congress should begin work immediately on changing the law, arguing that legislation could achieve his goal without the need for a constitutional amendment. However, legal experts say any such law would almost certainly face constitutional challenges because birthright citizenship is rooted in the US Constitution.

Trump rejects court ruling

The Supreme Court voted 6-3 to strike down an executive order Trump signed on his first day back in office that sought to end automatic citizenship for many children born in the US.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to every person born in the United States. He wrote that the amendment extended the promise of citizenship "to every free-born person in this land" and that the court would continue to uphold that principle.

Responding on his social media platform, Trump described the ruling as "too bad for our Country" but insisted that Congress could still act.

He argued that lawmakers could end birthright citizenship through legislation backed by the president, saying there was no need for what he called a "long and unwieldy" constitutional amendment. Trump urged Congress to begin work on the issue immediately.

Legal hurdles remain

Birthright citizenship is protected by both the 14th Amendment to the Constitution and federal citizenship law enacted in 1940.

Although Trump believes Congress could change the law, any legislation attempting to restrict birthright citizenship would likely face immediate legal challenges. Courts would have to decide whether such a law is compatible with the Constitution, raising the possibility that the issue could eventually return to the Supreme Court.

ABC News asked the White House for details on how the administration believes legislation could overcome the court's ruling and whether it expects further legal challenges. The White House referred questions to Trump's social media statement.

The president's comments marked a shift in emphasis following remarks he made a day earlier, when he said he would accept the Supreme Court's decision and acknowledged that the matter was ultimately for the justices to decide.

Later on Tuesday, Trump repeated his call for Congress to act while also highlighting other recent Supreme Court decisions that had gone in his favour.

Congress weighs next steps

Before Trump's latest comments, House Speaker Mike Johnson said Republicans were disappointed by the court's decision and expected Congress to consider possible responses.

Johnson said lawmakers would discuss whether a constitutional amendment was needed to address birthright citizenship, arguing that the current policy had been "grossly abused."

He acknowledged, however, that changing the Constitution would be difficult and could take many years. Under the US Constitution, an amendment requires approval by a two-thirds majority in both chambers of Congress before being ratified by three-quarters of the states.

Johnson said he believed a constitutional amendment was likely to be the only long-term solution following the Supreme Court's ruling.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?

Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 1 July 2026

View full article

This is one of his unconstitutional demands that he ain't gonna get.

I don't see a problem though with denying entry to foreign ladies in obvious late pregnancy though and also companies that are actively facilitating such birth citizenship trips.

Coincidentally I recently read about Chile which also has birthright citizenship, and some people are intentionally going there to have a baby and then the parents later can apply for residency based on a Chilean relative.

Chilean passport ranked 15th in the world. USA 12th.

So the U.S. isn't the only country that has issues around this.

Edited 1 hour ago1 hr by Jingthing

Denying entry to foreign ladies in obvious late pregnancy this has always been the case, but it is harder to do in practice There are places where for example no visa is required to enter America