In a pivotal move, the Trump administration formally requested the US Supreme Court to consider President Donald Trump’s executive order which aims to terminate birthright citizenship, marking a significant step in the administration's broader immigration policy objectives. The request, filed on Friday, argues for the necessity of reevaluating the traditional interpretation of the Citizenship Clause in the light of current circumstances.

The government’s petition for certiorari underscores a commitment to redefine what it means to be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S., proposing that this phrase encompasses political jurisdiction or allegiance, rather than mere regulatory jurisdiction. This interpretation would exclude children of undocumented immigrants, birth tourists, and temporary visitors from automatic citizenship. The administration highlights that the original intent of the Citizenship Clause was to grant citizenship to freed slaves and their descendants post-Civil War.

Historically, the Supreme Court has adhered to the interpretation set forth in the 1898 Wong Kim Ark case, which mandates that nearly all individuals born on U.S. soil are entitled to American citizenship. This interpretation has included the children of foreign visitors and undocumented immigrants.

The request to the Supreme Court follows a series of legal challenges against EO 14160, initiated by President Trump on his first day in office. Multiple rights organizations and 22 states quickly filed lawsuits, challenging the executive order as a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Subsequent federal court rulings have resulted in nationwide preliminary injunctions blocking the enforcement of this order, though these were later restricted by the Supreme Court to be plaintiff-specific.

In response to the Supreme Court's modification on injunctions, rights organizations pursued a class action lawsuit, leading to another preliminary injunction issued in July 2025 by US District Judge Joseph Laplante. This injunction prevents the enforcement of EO 14160 against any child born in the U.S. on or after the order's effective date, a decision upheld by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The United States remains one of the few nations to offer almost unconditional citizenship to individuals born on its soil—a policy rooted in the 14th Amendment, which was influenced by British common law and designed to rectify the pre-Civil War denial of citizenship based on racial lineage.

This case now awaits the Supreme Court’s decision on whether to hear the administration’s appeal, a ruling that could potentially reshape the landscape of U.S. citizenship law and its application.