Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Birthright Citizenship

On December 5, 2025, the US Supreme Court announced that it will review the constitutionality of President Trump’s executive order that seeks to reinterpret the 14th Amendment, which has long been understood to grant citizenship to nearly all individuals born on US soil. The administration argues that citizenship should only be granted to those born to at least one US citizen or lawful permanent resident. The case is Trump et al. v. Barbara et al., case number 25-365.

At the time of this reporting, it’s unclear when briefing and oral arguments will be scheduled.

Background: Earlier this year, lower courts unanimously determined that the Executive Order was contrary to the Constitution, federal immigration laws, and Supreme Court precedent.

Birthright citizenship is enshrined in the US Constitution in the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868: “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.”

Further, the Supreme Court ruled in 1898 in United States v. Wong Kim Ark that the provision of citizenship applies to anyone born in the United States regardless of their parents’ immigration status.

The Trump administration argues the clause in the 14th Amendment has a more limited meaning.

Go deeper: On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled 6–3 in favor of the Trump administration, allowing it to move forward—at least partially—with its controversial plan to end automatic birthright citizenship. The decision did not rule on the constitutionality of the EO itself but instead limited the scope of nationwide injunctions that had previously blocked the administration’s efforts.

The ruling restricts such injunctions to only the states, groups, or individuals who brought the lawsuits.

Erickson Insights & Analysis

Erickson Immigration Group will continue to monitor developments and share updates as more news becomes available. Please contact your employer or EIG attorney if you have questions about anything we’re reporting above or if you have case-specific questions.