Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

ASEAN NOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Become a member

Become a member

Blow to Trump as Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship

The US Supreme Court has ruled that children born in the United States are entitled to citizenship under the Constitution, rejecting President Donald Trump's attempt to end the long-established policy through executive action.

Get today's headlines by email image.png

Court rejects executive order

In a 6-3 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts said that children born in the US to parents who are in the country unlawfully or on a temporary basis are citizens from birth under the 14th Amendment.

Trump had sought to narrow the constitutional guarantee by arguing that children of undocumented immigrants and some temporary visitors were not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States and therefore should not automatically receive citizenship.

The ruling marks a significant defeat for the president's immigration agenda and preserves a constitutional principle that has been in place for more than 150 years.

Writing for the majority, Roberts said the framers of the 14th Amendment had extended the promise of citizenship to "every free-born person in this land".

"Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights – to freely participate in our political community," he wrote, adding: "We keep that promise today."

Trump vows to continue fight

Reacting on Truth Social, Trump described the decision as "too bad" and pledged to continue efforts to end birthright citizenship through Congress rather than by constitutional amendment.

"No long and unwieldy constitutional amendment is necessary," he wrote. "Congress should today start work on ending expensive, and unfair to our country, birthright citizenship."

The United States has recognised birthright citizenship since 1868, when the 14th Amendment was adopted following the Civil War. Originally intended to secure the rights of formerly enslaved people, the amendment states that all persons born or naturalised in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, are citizens of the country.

Sharp division among justices

Three conservative justices – Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito – dissented.

Justice Thomas argued that the 14th Amendment was being used beyond its original purpose, saying it had been "repurposed for political projects" and that the formerly enslaved people it was designed to protect "were Americans" who owed no allegiance to another country.

Justice Alito described the majority's decision as a "serious mistake", arguing it grants citizenship to almost anyone born in the United States, including children whose parents travel to the country specifically to give birth before returning home.

The case carried particular importance for Trump, who made a rare appearance at the Supreme Court during oral arguments in April.

Political reaction

White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller criticised the ruling, calling it "one of the most destructive and outrageous decisions" in the court's history.

Writing on X, he said: "American citizenship is not the birthright of the world. No provision of the Constitution can be read to require our national self-obliteration."

Democrats and civil rights groups welcomed the outcome.

House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said the Supreme Court had upheld both the Constitution and longstanding legal precedent by confirming that everyone born in the United States is an American citizen.

Dariely Rodriguez, chief counsel at the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said the judgment reaffirmed a principle that has existed for more than a century.

"Anyone born on American soil, regardless of the legal status of their parents, is born an American citizen," she said, adding that the decision demonstrated the country had "endured an incredible test of our collective will as a nation and have prevailed."

Join the discussion? Create account. orange.png

Already a member? haveyr-say.png


image.png
Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 1 July 2026

User Feedback

Recommended Comments

unblocktheplanet Diamond Member

unblocktheplanet

Advanced Member
10 hours ago, FlorC said:

Sad day for the US.

Only way to stop it now , is to bar pregnant women from entry.

Unless they get an abortion. In which states now?

unblocktheplanet Diamond Member

unblocktheplanet

Advanced Member
2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

A sad day for Democracy.

Jeezus! What does 'democracy' have to do with birthright citizenship?!?

unblocktheplanet Diamond Member

unblocktheplanet

Advanced Member
2 hours ago, impulse said:

Seriously? Do you really think they can deny entry to a woman who looks pregnant without getting sued?

Ya mean, because she was just fat?

Luuk Chaai Platinum Member

Luuk Chaai

Advanced Member

amazing how the "press/news.. always never tell the entire story

Kavanaugh suggested, Congress“could amend” that law “or otherwise enact new legislation establishing exceptions to birthright citizenship for children born to foreign citizens unlawfully or temporarily in the country. But,” he noted, “Congress has not yet done so.”

So expect this to go right to the front of the line

Front Row Silver Member

Front Row

Advanced Member

Personally I’m disappointed that this decision wasn’t 9️⃣ - 0️⃣.

What makes me happiest about this ruling is that Stephen Miller the racist is having what might possibly be an aneurism.

Front Row Silver Member

Front Row

Advanced Member
17 hours ago, Effective altruism said:

Didn't the left refer to SCOTUS as the MAGA court?

It was, depending on how you count Kavanaugh, a 6-3 or 5-4 decision.

Could have been, should have been a 9-0 decision. So the label probably still fits.

mushroomdave Silver Member

mushroomdave

Advanced Member

Looks good on the clown.

Guess him attending "trying" to influence the justices during oral arguments didn't work.

Just like his reflecting "green" pool !!!!

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

JonnyF Star Member

JonnyF

Advanced Member
12 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Jeezus! What does 'democracy' have to do with birthright citizenship?!?

Ask the people who voted for Trump who are now seeing him being blocked at every turn by appointed, not elected, supreme Court justices.

Sad day for democracy .

JerryM Gold Member

JerryM

Advanced Member

It seems with Trump, that any issued e,xecutive order cannot be in conflict with any prior legislation or judicial order is just an inconvenience.

impulse Star Member

impulse

Advanced Member

Ya mean, because she was just fat?

Nowadays, they're not even allowed to claim she's a woman, for fear of being sued.

dinsdale Star Member

dinsdale

Advanced Member

American woman who resides in the US gives birth in Australia and flies back to the US a week after giving birth. Is her baby a) an Australian citizen b) a US citizen or c) both? Chinese woman who resides in China gives birth in the US and flies back to China a week after giving birth. Is her baby a) a Chinese citizen b) a US citizen or c) both? Answers are b) and c).

JerryM Gold Member

JerryM

Advanced Member
22 hours ago, JerryM said:

I'm with Kavanaugh and ever since the orals.

Even if Trump had won in having the Supreme Court uphold birthright executive order, the next President can completely overturn, amend, or revoke an executive order.

Front Row Silver Member

Front Row

Advanced Member
6 hours ago, dinsdale said:

American woman who resides in the US gives birth in Australia and flies back to the US a week after giving birth. Is her baby a) an Australian citizen b) a US citizen or c) both? Chinese woman who resides in China gives birth in the US and flies back to China a week after giving birth. Is her baby a) a Chinese citizen b) a US citizen or c) both? Answers are b) and c).

What’s your point? Australia is not the USA and the USA is not Australia. Or are you subtly suggesting that Australia should make laws for the USA?

JerryM Gold Member

JerryM

Advanced Member
5 minutes ago, Front Row said:

What’s your point?

He's just upset that he can't blame the ruling on left-wing activist judges.

dinsdale Star Member

dinsdale

Advanced Member
6 minutes ago, Front Row said:

What’s your point? Australia is not the USA and the USA is not Australia. Or are you subtly suggesting that Australia should make laws for the USA?

If you don't understand my point so be it.

Front Row Silver Member

Front Row

Advanced Member
On 7/1/2026 at 3:26 PM, retayl said:

Although not an American I find the whole subject of the Constitution fascinating in terms of how a set of values created 250 years ago applies in the modern world. What I will say is that this Constitution contributed over those past 250 years into making USA the great country that it is. There now seems to be an urgent need to undo parts of it that do not fit with a certain agenda. As a previous poster said, the Second Amendment was passed for muzzle loading flintlocks but now embraces AK47s but I don’t see those wishing to change birthrights pushing for modernising the 2nd, while a case could be made for both.

Ever hear of the Bible? Old book that seems to have control over a whole lot of people. Magna Carta, an ancient text with long lasting concepts. The constitution at 250 is still in diapers.

Front Row Silver Member

Front Row

Advanced Member
8 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

If you don't understand my point so be it.

There should be a face palm emoji for retorts aw witty as this one.

https://media2.giphy.com/media/1RHfH5eUm5iHm/200.gif?cid=d9f52f32ul2q6zn6gpxrjbyiundh1kq6prhzlj0oweb7xbik&ep=v1_gifs_search&rid=200.gif&ct=g

dinsdale Star Member

dinsdale

Advanced Member
41 minutes ago, Front Row said:

There should be a face palm emoji for retorts aw witty as this one.

https://media2.giphy.com/media/1RHfH5eUm5iHm/200.gif?cid=d9f52f32ul2q6zn6gpxrjbyiundh1kq6prhzlj0oweb7xbik&ep=v1_gifs_search&rid=200.gif&ct=g

Let me make it crystal clear then. What other country in the world can someone come in, drop a baby, return to their home country yet the baby is a citizen of where the mother who maybe spent a couple of weeks or a month gave birth and that baby gains citizenship of that country.

earlinclaifornia Platinum Member

earlinclaifornia

Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Let me make it crystal clear then. What other country in the world can someone come in, drop a baby and leave and that baby gains citizenship of that country.

Several countries grant automatic birthright citizenship (jus soli) to any child born on their soil, regardless of the parents' nationality or immigration status. In the Americas, this includes nations like Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, and numerous Caribbean and Central American countries

dinsdale Star Member

dinsdale

Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

Several countries grant automatic birthright citizenship (jus soli) to any child born on their soil, regardless of the parents' nationality or immigration status. In the Americas, this includes nations like Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, and numerous Caribbean and Central American countries

Fair enough. Crazy stuff. A person can illegally enter a country, give birth and that child gains automatic citizenship in selected countries. Seems the Chinese are fond of going to the US for this.

MikeandDow Ruby Member

MikeandDow

Advanced Member
1 hour ago, dinsdale said:

Fair enough. Crazy stuff. A person can illegally enter a country, give birth and that child gains automatic citizenship in selected countries. Seems the Chinese are fond of going to the US for this.

Where have you been living in a cave this has been going on for lots of years !! the Chinese for example don't need a visa to go to the USA for to give birth this is NOT new !!

dinsdale Star Member

dinsdale

Advanced Member
19 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

Where have you been living in a cave this has been going on for lots of years !! the Chinese for example don't need a visa to go to the USA for to give birth this is NOT new !!

Never said it was. Not sure about birth tourism though.

AI Overview

"U.S. "birth tourism" involves foreign nationals who travel on tourist visas with the explicit goal of giving birth so their child receives U.S. citizenship. Operations that formerly catered to this market, such as California-based Ada International and Florida-based Miami Mama, have been shut down due to federal investigations."
Of course establishments like these wouldn't cater to the illegals though as it would cost too much.

Hanaguma Ruby Member

Hanaguma

Advanced Member
1 hour ago, MikeandDow said:

Where have you been living in a cave this has been going on for lots of years !! the Chinese for example don't need a visa to go to the USA for to give birth this is NOT new !!

The number I read was 30,000 per year.

Hanaguma Ruby Member

Hanaguma

Advanced Member
3 hours ago, earlinclaifornia said:

Several countries grant automatic birthright citizenship (jus soli) to any child born on their soil, regardless of the parents' nationality or immigration status. In the Americas, this includes nations like Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, and numerous Caribbean and Central American countries

So the US should model its citizenship laws after those of Mexico and Brazil? Sounds...interesting.

The rest of the world- Europe, most of Asia, etc. do not do this. It would be laughable in fact. Ask a German if a Nigerian couple have a baby in Germany, is that baby a German citizen? The puzzled look would be priceless.

It strikes me as odd that citizenship is handed out like candy at Halloween.

TedG Ruby Member

TedG

Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

So the US should model its citizenship laws after those of Mexico and Brazil? Sounds...interesting.

The rest of the world- Europe, most of Asia, etc. do not do this. It would be laughable in fact. Ask a German if a Nigerian couple have a baby in Germany, is that baby a German citizen? The puzzled look would be priceless.

It strikes me as odd that citizenship is handed out like candy at Halloween.

The 14th was written to ensure the former slaves were granted citizenship. This gets abused as much as the asylum laws.  There should be some reform, but the Democrats will never allow it.

Front Row Silver Member

Front Row

Advanced Member
3 hours ago, dinsdale said:

Fair enough. Crazy stuff. A person can illegally enter a country, give birth and that child gains automatic citizenship in selected countries. Seems the Chinese are fond of going to the US for this.

Actually, my first exposure to birthright citizenship was when Chinese were making their way into Hong Kong to give birth, and thus gain Hong Kong citizenship for the child.

Can’t remember exactly when. Pre 1997 for sure. And I don’t know what’s happened with the rules since the handover.

dinsdale Star Member

dinsdale

Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Front Row said:

Actually, my first exposure to birthright citizenship was when Chinese were making their way into Hong Kong to give birth, and thus gain Hong Kong citizenship for the child.

Can’t remember exactly when. Pre 1997 for sure. And I don’t know what’s happened with the rules since the handover.

I guess back then it would have been UK citizenship. I wonder what the rules were. Leave China for Hong Kong for a few days before giving birth, give birth and head back across to China? Bingo one kid with UK citizenship.

Not quite. I looked it up.

AI Overview

Children born in Hong Kong before July 1, 1997, did not automatically receive full British citizenship. Instead, they were granted a secondary nationality status known as British Dependent Territories Citizen (BDTC), which later transitioned to British National (Overseas) [BN(O)].

These BN(O) statuses granted British nationality and passport rights, but crucially did not include the automatic Right of Abode to live and work in the United Kingdom.

Bit different in the US I guess. Cross the border illegally, drop your bundle and bingo your kid's a US citizen. Pay lots of money and go for a holiday in the US. Drop your bundle and go home with your baby and bingo you now have a US citizen in your family. Absolutely insane.

dinsdale Star Member

dinsdale

Advanced Member
On 7/1/2026 at 8:56 AM, Bangkok Barry said:

1 - Have any 'birthright immigrants' caused as much harm to the reputation of the United States as 'original' Americans?
2 - Have any 'birthright immigrants' fought for the country they were born in, a country which now wants to dis-own them? I'm assuming that if they have an American birth certificate they are eligible for service if that is the career they choose?

  1. I don't know what this is meant to mean.

  2. What's a "birthright immigrant"? If your are born in the US by absolutely any woman no matter who that woman is be it legal status or country of residence, you cannot be an immigrant. You're an automatic citizen and as such cannot be classified as an immigrant. Child of an immigrant, an illegal or a birth tourist mother yes but not an immigrant. As for "fought for the country they were born in, a country which now wants to dis-own them" this is fanciful. It's about stopping it happening.

Front Row Silver Member

Front Row

Advanced Member
8 hours ago, dinsdale said:

Let me make it crystal clear then. What other country in the world can someone come in, drop a baby, return to their home country yet the baby is a citizen of where the mother who maybe spent a couple of weeks or a month gave birth and that baby gains citizenship of that country.

  1. Open a search engine

  2. Input “list of countries where birthright citizenship exists”

  3. Hit “enter” or “return”

You will find there are more than a few.

Crystal clear, indeed.

Front Row Silver Member

Front Row

Advanced Member
4 hours ago, dinsdale said:

I guess back then it would have been UK citizenship. I wonder what the rules were. Leave China for Hong Kong for a few days before giving birth, give birth and head back across to China? Bingo one kid with UK citizenship.

Not quite. I looked it up.

AI Overview

Children born in Hong Kong before July 1, 1997, did not automatically receive full British citizenship. Instead, they were granted a secondary nationality status known as British Dependent Territories Citizen (BDTC), which later transitioned to British National (Overseas) [BN(O)].

These BN(O) statuses granted British nationality and passport rights, but crucially did not include the automatic Right of Abode to live and work in the United Kingdom.

Bit different in the US I guess. Cross the border illegally, drop your bundle and bingo your kid's a US citizen. Pay lots of money and go for a holiday in the US. Drop your bundle and go home with your baby and bingo you now have a US citizen in your family. Absolutely insane.

Also worth pointing out that at that time Chinese were generally not allowed to travel to Hong Kong, never mind to any other foreign country. So getting into the territory was no simple stroll across the border.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.