IS U.S.A. BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP GOING TO CONTINUE? Executive Order 14160, the 14th Amendment, and the Supreme Court of the U.S.’s Ruling on June 27, 2025, on Trump, President of the United States, Et. Al. v. Casa, Inc., Et Al.
January 20, 2025, United States President, Donald J. Trump signed Executive Order 14160, “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” which states in part “the Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States. The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” And goes on to state that, “privilege of United States citizenship does not automatically extend to persons born in the United States: (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.”
Executive Order 14160 continues to state that, privilege of United States citizenship does not automatically extend in the instance “(2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States at the time of said person’s birth was lawful but temporary […] and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.”
Since then, Executive Order 14160 has been challenged in three separate courts due to its nature. Challenges arose in the district courts of Trump v. CASA, Trump v. Washington, and Trump v. New Jersey for several reasons. The first was one of Federal Court Jurisdiction, because Federal District Courts were creating nation-wide injunctions to curtail the executive branch, reaching beyond their district court jurisdictions. Next, Executive Order 14160 stands to alter the immigration landscape due to it’s interpretation and contextual meaning abridging the 14th amendment to the United States Constitution.
The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified by most of the then current U.S. states in 1868. When effectuated the 14th Amendment overturned the Supreme Court’s 1857 Dred Scott decision that had declared individuals of African descent, (enslaved or free in the USA) were not and could not be citizens of the United States.
A clear reading of the text of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states as follows:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Over time this text has been interpreted as laying a foundation for birthright citizenship in the United States, becoming a fundamental piece of writing significantly shaping the course of American history and immigration. Now, with Executive Order 14160, what’s being challenged in here is the idea of what it means to be “subject to the jurisdiction thereof…”
As related to this Executive Order 14160, three separate Federal litigation cases challenged this premise, Trump v. CASA, Trump v. Washington, and Trump v. New Jersey.
The U.S. Supreme Court, ruled to limit the ability of District Court Judges to grant universal injunctions, regarding the ongoing litigations over birthright citizenship in the three cases, such as: in Trump v. CASA, Trump v. Washington, and Trump v. New Jersey. And a quick read of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision on June 27, 2025, on Trump, President of the United States, Et. Al. v. Casa, Inc., Et Al., on application for partial Stay states that,
“The applications do not raise—and thus the Court does not address—the question whether the Executive Order violates the Citizenship Clause or Nationality Act. Instead, the issue the Court decides is whether, under the Judiciary Act of 1789, federal courts have equitable authority to issue universal injunctions.”
So, where does that leave U.S. birthright citizenship? Pursuant to the Supreme Court, “[t]he plaintiffs [in Trump, President of the United States, Et. Al. v. Casa, Inc., Et Al.,] allege that the Executive Order violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause, §1, and §201 of the Nationality Act of 1940,” and the Supreme Court states it explicitly did not address that Birthright Citizenship portion since the “applications do not raise—and thus the Court does not address—the question whether the Executive Order violates the Citizenship Clause or Nationality Act.”
So, what will happen now in the interim for children born to mothers unlawfully present in the US without a Lawful Permanent father? What also will happen to the babies born in the United States of mothers lawfully in the USA but on some sort of temporary visa who have fathers that also are not lawful permanent residents or citizens?
According to the American Immigration Lawyers Association, which states in a post on June 27, 2025, there will likely be a “prolonged and punishing legal battle across the country. We are now facing the prospect of hundreds of individual lawsuits and likely multiple class actions to protect a right that is plainly guaranteed by the Constitution.”
Make sure to follow our website for latest in USA immigration news.
Legal American Dream P.A., is a Florida-based immigration law firm, defending immigrants in all 50 states.
See More Resources on This Topic: