Birthright Citizenship After Trump v. Barbara: What the Supreme Court Decided

The Supreme Court ruled on June 30, 2026 in Trump v. Barbara that children born in the United States are US citizens at birth, even if their parents are undocumented or only temporarily in the country on a visa. The ruling struck down Executive Order 14160, the January 2025 order that tried to end birthright citizenship for those children. A narrower order, EO 14418 (August 6, 2026), followed. A federal court in Maryland blocked it for a certified class on September 2, 2026, and further litigation is ongoing.

Key points

• Holding: the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause covers children born on US soil to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present. EO 14160 is invalid.
• Vote: 6-3 on the result. Chief Justice Roberts wrote for five justices, and Justice Kavanaugh concurred on statutory grounds.
• EO 14418 targets narrower groups: children of “alien enemies,” foreign government employees, and paid birth tourism, surrogacy or fraud arrangements.
• September 2, 2026: a preliminary injunction in CASA v. Trump (D. Md.) bars denying citizenship under EO 14418 to the certified class. A separate lawsuit, Nathan v. Trump, was filed in Washington, D.C. on September 28, 2026.
• For children of visa holders, such as H-1B, F-1 and L-1 parents, nothing has changed: a US birth means US citizenship.

What EO 14160 tried to do

Signed on January 20, 2025, EO 14160 directed federal agencies not to issue or accept citizenship documents (such as passports) for children born in the US after February 19, 2025 if:

1. the mother was unlawfully present and the father was not a US citizen or permanent resident, or
2. the mother was lawfully but temporarily present (for example, on a student, work or tourist visa) and the father was not a US citizen or permanent resident.

Lower courts blocked the order before it took effect. In June 2025, in Trump v. CASA, the Supreme Court limited “universal” injunctions. After that, challengers relied on class actions, and the order remained blocked while the merits went to the Supreme Court.

What the Supreme Court held

In Trump v. Barbara (No. 25-365), the Court affirmed the lower court and held EO 14160 invalid (opinion):

• The Citizenship Clause (“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens”) covers children of parents who are in the US unlawfully or temporarily.
• The majority relied on the common-law rule of jus soli (citizenship by place of birth) and reaffirmed United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). It recognized only a few narrow historical exceptions, such as children of foreign diplomats and of enemy forces in hostile occupation.
• The Court rejected any rule tying a child’s citizenship to the parents’ domicile, lawful status or permanent presence.

How the justices voted

According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS LSB11468):

Position	Justices
Majority opinion (constitutional holding)	Chief Justice Roberts, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett and Jackson
Concurring in the judgment (statutory grounds, 8 U.S.C. 1401(a))	Kavanaugh
Dissenting	Thomas (joined by Gorsuch), Alito, and Gorsuch

So the order lost 6-3, but the constitutional reasoning had five votes. Justice Kavanaugh would have decided the case under the citizenship statute instead.

The new order: EO 14418

On August 6, 2026, the President signed EO 14418, “Continuing to Protect the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” published in the Federal Register on August 11, 2026 (Federal Register). Where neither parent is a US citizen, it directs agencies not to issue or accept citizenship documents for a child if:

• a parent is an “alien enemy,” defined to include members of designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations and Specially Designated Global Terrorists;
• a parent is a foreign government employee, such as an ambassador, embassy or consular staff member, other foreign official, or an employee of an international organization with immunity;
• a parent paid for citizenship or used fraud, including paying to bring the mother to the US to give birth (“birth tourism”) or using a US-based surrogate through a commercial arrangement;
• the child was born in a US territory where federal law does not grant citizenship at birth.

The order says this list is not exhaustive and told agencies to issue guidance within 30 days. A companion order on “Ending Birth Tourism” was published the same day.

Court status of EO 14418 (as of October 11, 2026)

Case	Court	Status
CASA, Inc. v. Trump, No. 8:25-cv-00201	US District Court for the District of Maryland	Preliminary injunction, September 2, 2026. Bars the government from denying citizenship under EO 14418 to the certified class (children who would have been denied citizenship under EO 14160). The court found the plaintiffs likely to succeed because Barbara already held children in that class are citizens. The injunction does not stop agencies from issuing guidance. An appeal was expected. We found no appellate ruling as of October 11, 2026
Nathan v. Trump	US District Court for the District of Columbia	Filed September 28, 2026 by the ACLU and partner groups. No ruling yet

The order has not been implemented for the protected class. Its practical reach outside that class is unclear and depends on agency guidance and further rulings. We will update this page and our updates feed.

What this means for families

Children of visa holders (H-1B, L-1, F-1, J-1, O-1, TN and others)

A child born in the US is a US citizen at birth. Ordinary visa status is not one of the EO 14418 categories. You can apply for a US passport and Social Security number for your child as usual. Your child’s citizenship does not give you, the parent, any immigration status. A US citizen child can petition for parents only after turning 21. See sponsoring parents, siblings and adult children.

Children of undocumented parents

Barbara confirms these children are citizens. EO 14418 does not target undocumented status as such.

Children of diplomats and foreign government staff

Children of foreign diplomats with full immunity have long been treated as outside the Citizenship Clause. EO 14418 goes further, to other foreign government and international organization employees. That expansion is being challenged in court. Families in this group should get legal advice.

Births through birth tourism or commercial surrogacy

EO 14418 targets these cases. Separately, visa officers may refuse a B visa if the main purpose of the trip is to give birth to obtain citizenship for the child. If you used a surrogate in the US, speak to a lawyer about documenting your child’s citizenship.

Getting proof of citizenship for a US-born child

1. Birth certificate: order a certified copy from the state or county vital records office where the child was born.
2. US passport: for children under 16, apply in person with Form DS-11, the birth certificate, parents’ IDs, and the consent of both parents (State Department).
3. Social Security number: usually requested at the hospital when the birth is registered.

If an agency refuses a document, write down the reason and contact a lawyer or one of the groups litigating these cases.

What to do next

1. If your child was born in the US, get a certified birth certificate and a US passport. Keep copies safe.
2. If a parent works for a foreign government or international organization, or used a commercial surrogate, consult a licensed immigration lawyer about EO 14418.
3. Watch for an appeal of the September 2 injunction and any ruling in Nathan v. Trump.
4. For citizenship by naturalization instead of birth, see how to apply for US citizenship and practice with our free US citizenship test.

This article is general information, not legal advice. Status checked October 11, 2026. More on our US hub.