The U.S. government asked for a rehearing of the Supreme Court of the United States’ (SCOTUS) birthright citizenship decision. According to the New York Times, the government declared its frustration with the decision on June 30, 2026. Later, the President posted on Truth Social a desire for a rehearing “immediately.” Additionally, he called the ruling a “miscarriage of justice” and pointed to reports of billboards near the southern border advertising birth tourism services. As of this writing, no formal rehearing petition has appeared on the Court’s docket. The appeals opening ends on July 25, 2026.
Background
On January 20, 2025, the White House issued Executive Order 14160, titled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.” The order removes birthright citizenship from children born on U.S. soil without a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident parent. Lower courts blocked the order almost immediately, and after the injunctions survived on appeal, the administration carried the fight to the Supreme Court. The result is Trump v. Barbara.
SCOTUS ruled 6-3 against implementing the executive order on June 30, 2026. The decision maintains the current understanding of birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. Chief Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion, joined by Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett, and Jackson. Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch dissented.
Impact
In response to the ruling, Rep. John McGuire (R-VA) introduced the Birthright Citizenship Clarification Act on July 9, 2026. If passed, the bill implements the executive order into U.S. law via legislation rather than executive action. The bill draws on language from Justice Kavanaugh’s concurrence, arguing that Executive Order 14160 conflicted with an existing federal statute rather than the Constitution itself. Justice Kavanaugh explained Congress might resolve the issue through amending said statute.
It’s worth noting that five justices reached a different conclusion: they held the issue was constitutional rather than statutory, meaning a simple act of Congress isn’t enough to accomplish what the bill’s intent. Whether the bill survives a constitutional challenge, or passes Congress at all, remains uncertain.
As always, ILBSG actively monitors ongoing U.S. immigration news. If you have questions about any U.S. immigration related issue, contact us. Working with an experienced attorney ensures you get the right advice based on the most recent laws. In an ever-evolving immigration policy landscape, it’s particularly critical you get the right advice.