US Supreme Court Birthright Citizenship Ruling Triggers Nationwide Confusion and Legal Rush
The immediate aftermath has seen a surge in inquiries to immigration attorneys and the filing of new lawsuits
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Friday, June 27, to restrict the power of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions has thrown the future of birthright citizenship into uncertainty, prompting widespread confusion among immigrants and legal experts.
While the Court allowed President Donald Trump’s executive order—aimed at denying automatic citizenship to children born in the U.S. to certain noncitizen parents—to move forward in states that did not specifically challenge it, the justices did not rule on the constitutionality of restricting birthright citizenship itself.
The ruling means that, starting July 27, 2025, Trump’s order could be enforced in as many as 28 states, potentially denying citizenship to thousands of newborns each year unless at least one parent is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.
In states with ongoing injunctions, such as Maryland and Washington, children born to noncitizen parents will still receive citizenship as before. This patchwork of enforcement is expected to create significant administrative challenges for hospitals, government agencies, and families, with some parents fearing their children could be left stateless or unable to access key benefits.
The immediate aftermath has seen a surge in inquiries to immigration attorneys and the filing of new lawsuits, including efforts to establish a nationwide class of affected individuals.
Legal analysts predict further court battles as plaintiffs seek to block the policy in additional states and possibly restore nationwide protections.
The Supreme Court’s decision did not address whether Trump’s executive order violates the 14th Amendment, leaving the core legal question unresolved and the humanitarian impact uncertain.
