I’m seeing all these headlines about a recent Supreme Court decision that involves birthright citizenship. What’s the deal?
It’s that time of year again. The U.S. Supreme Court goes into recess during the summer, so typically the court issues a flurry of opinions in mid-to-late June. This year was no different. One of the cases getting the most attention deals with birthright citizenship, sort of. While many headlines on the case reference birthright citizenship, the recent opinion focuses on a procedural issue – whether a federal court can temporarily block (through an injunction) presidential executive orders nationwide while the constitutionality of the executive order is litigated. Here’s what happened.
President Trump has issued many executive orders in his second term. One of President Trump’s executive orders limits birthright citizenship, which most legal scholars believe is unconstitutional. The constitutionality of the executive order on birthright citizenship is being challenged in federal court. Several federal court district judges have granted universal nationwide injunctive relief. These nationwide injunctions prohibit the presidential executive order from taking effect anywhere in the United States until the constitutionality of the order is fully reviewed by the courts, which can often take years.
The disputed legal issue boiled down to whether one federal judge can grant a universal, nationwide injunction (basically meaning a temporarily block) on the president’s executive orders across the entire country, or as President Trump and the executive branch’s legal team argued, whether the injunction should be limited to only the party litigants in that specific case.
The court’s conservative majority ruled in favor of presidential executive order power. The opinion says that as a general rule, successful injunctive challenges to a presidential executive order will only benefit the specific plaintiffs that bring that specific case (class actions could be an exception).
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who authored the dissent, argued that the president’s power does not permit him to rewrite the Constitution. Justice Sotomayor’s dissent did not hold back. She wrote, “With the stroke of a pen, the president has made a solemn mockery of our Constitution.”
At its core, the recent decision is a lot more about procedural separation of powers between the executive branch and judicial branch than birthright citizenship. The court’s ruling makes it much more difficult for plaintiffs to challenge executive orders (by President Trump or future presidents) on a nationwide basis.
This article appears in July 4 • 2025.