Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share Trump v. Barbara
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
Trump v. Barbara
Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-365_4hdj.pdf
Case background
On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order No. 14160,
titled Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship. The Order
provides that children born in the United States to parents who are
unlawfully or temporarily present here are not “subject to the jurisdiction”
of the United States, and thus do not qualify for citizenship under the
Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause or the Immigration and Nationality
Act (INA), which uses the same language. Several parents filed suit, some in
the name of their children, arguing that the Executive Order violates both
the Fourteenth Amendment and the INA. The District Court agreed,
provisionally certified a nationwide class of children who would be denied
citizenship by the Order, and preliminarily enjoined the Order’s enforcement.
This Court granted certiorari before judgment.
Questions Presented
(1) The question presented is whether the Executive Order complies on its face with the Citizenship Clause and with 8 U.S.C. 1401(a), which codifies that Clause.
Holding
Children born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily
present are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and are
citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. The
Clause mirrors the common law’s criteria for citizenship: a child born on
American soil and subject to American law is a citizen, subject only to the
narrow exceptions recognized at common law — such as the children of foreign
ministers and members of Indian tribes — none of which applies to the
children of parents unlawfully or temporarily present. The Court’s precedent
in United States v. Wong Kim Ark confirms this rule, and arguments for
limiting birthright citizenship to the children of those domiciled in the
United States find scant support in the text or history of the Clause. The
judgment of the District Court is affirmed.
The Court
Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justices
Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett, and Jackson joined. Justice Jackson filed a
concurring opinion, in which Justice Sotomayor joined as to the introduction
and Part I. Justice Kavanaugh filed an opinion concurring in the judgment and
dissenting in part. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, in which
Justice Gorsuch joined. Justice Alito and Justice Gorsuch each filed
dissenting opinions.
What this episode contains
This episode is an AI-narrated reading of the majority opinion in
Trump v. Barbara, written by Justice Roberts.
AI disclosure: The voice in this episode is AI-generated, using a machine
learning model styled to loosely resemble the authoring justice. Tone,
inflection, pacing, and emphasis are artifacts of the model and should not be
attributed to Justice Roberts. The text being read is the Court’s published
majority opinion, lightly adapted to improve readability for the spoken format.
View all episodes
By So OrderedOpinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-365_4hdj.pdf
Case background
On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order No. 14160,
titled Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship. The Order
provides that children born in the United States to parents who are
unlawfully or temporarily present here are not “subject to the jurisdiction”
of the United States, and thus do not qualify for citizenship under the
Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause or the Immigration and Nationality
Act (INA), which uses the same language. Several parents filed suit, some in
the name of their children, arguing that the Executive Order violates both
the Fourteenth Amendment and the INA. The District Court agreed,
provisionally certified a nationwide class of children who would be denied
citizenship by the Order, and preliminarily enjoined the Order’s enforcement.
This Court granted certiorari before judgment.
Questions Presented
(1) The question presented is whether the Executive Order complies on its face with the Citizenship Clause and with 8 U.S.C. 1401(a), which codifies that Clause.
Holding
Children born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily
present are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and are
citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. The
Clause mirrors the common law’s criteria for citizenship: a child born on
American soil and subject to American law is a citizen, subject only to the
narrow exceptions recognized at common law — such as the children of foreign
ministers and members of Indian tribes — none of which applies to the
children of parents unlawfully or temporarily present. The Court’s precedent
in United States v. Wong Kim Ark confirms this rule, and arguments for
limiting birthright citizenship to the children of those domiciled in the
United States find scant support in the text or history of the Clause. The
judgment of the District Court is affirmed.
The Court
Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justices
Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett, and Jackson joined. Justice Jackson filed a
concurring opinion, in which Justice Sotomayor joined as to the introduction
and Part I. Justice Kavanaugh filed an opinion concurring in the judgment and
dissenting in part. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, in which
Justice Gorsuch joined. Justice Alito and Justice Gorsuch each filed
dissenting opinions.
What this episode contains
This episode is an AI-narrated reading of the majority opinion in
Trump v. Barbara, written by Justice Roberts.
AI disclosure: The voice in this episode is AI-generated, using a machine
learning model styled to loosely resemble the authoring justice. Tone,
inflection, pacing, and emphasis are artifacts of the model and should not be
attributed to Justice Roberts. The text being read is the Court’s published
majority opinion, lightly adapted to improve readability for the spoken format.