On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down an executive order by President Donald Trump that declared children born to parents who are in the country illegally or on temporary status cannot become U.S. citizens, even if born on U.S. soil.

Based on a long-standing understanding of the 14th Amendment—adopted after the Civil War—and recent federal laws, the justices ruled that anyone born in the United States is a citizen, with only extremely limited exceptions.

President Trump immediately condemned the Supreme Court's ruling.

“The Supreme Court has upheld the birthright citizenship system, which is a regrettable moment for our country, but this can be easily rectified through legislation in Congress with the President’s support. That has been confirmed in this process,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

He added, “No long and complex Constitutional Amendment is needed! Congress must start working today to abolish this harmful and costly birthright citizenship system. I will give them my full support!”

While some called for a constitutional amendment, others urged Congress to take immediate action to strengthen immigration laws.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) called the decision “very disappointing,” while Senator Eric Schmitt (R-MO) announced plans to introduce a constitutional amendment to restore what he termed “America’s original understanding of citizenship.”

In the case of Trump v. Barbara, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of those who challenged the President’s executive order, which sought to limit birthright citizenship to children of U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents.

The ruling upholds the long-standing interpretation of the 14th Amendment, which grants automatic U.S. citizenship to nearly everyone born on U.S. territory, with limited exceptions such as children of foreign diplomats.

Speaking to reporters after the ruling, Speaker Johnson stated that he wanted to review the opinion closely before analyzing it, but made it clear that he disagreed with the outcome.

“I have to read the opinion. You could call it a textualist or originalist perspective,” Johnson said. “This system has been severely abused in recent years... I am very disappointed with the result of this ruling.”

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which supported the Trump administration in the case, argued that the justices misinterpreted both the Constitution and the Supreme Court’s previous ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark.

FAIR contended that only parents legally authorized to be in the United States should be able to confer citizenship upon their children born here.

“The Supreme Court has misinterpreted the Constitution, and that error ensures that the negative consequences of our failure to properly enforce immigration laws regarding birthright citizenship for children of those here illegally will continue to grow exponentially,” said Dale L. Wilcox, Executive Director and General Counsel of FAIR, in a statement.

Wilcox added that the ruling makes it more important than ever to strengthen border security and crack down on illegal immigration.

Senator Schmitt described the ruling as “wrong, dangerous, and a disastrous result for American sovereignty and the American people.”

“The decision to uphold unlimited birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens and foreign nationals on temporary status is flawed and represents a disastrous outcome for our sovereignty and the future of our Republic,” Schmitt said.

“Ordinary legislation cannot repair this damage,” he added. “I will soon introduce a constitutional amendment to restore the sacred bond between American citizens and their government.”

Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) also argued that the ruling necessitates a constitutional amendment.

“Neither the Founding Fathers, nor the drafters of the 14th Amendment, nor the millions of Americans who have fought and died for our country over the years, ever intended to build a nation where citizenship could be so easily ‘purchased’—whether through ‘birth tourism’ by Chinese Communist Party members or the massive border invasions neglected by faithless presidents,” Lee posted on X.

“This is the cheap, dishonestly obtained citizenship that the Supreme Court upheld today. The long fight for a constitutional amendment begins now,” Lee added.

Several House Republicans echoed these concerns.

Representative Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) pointed out that the Founding Fathers “did not anticipate a birth tourism industry,” warning that “China is celebrating right now.”

Representative Kat Cammack (R-FL) said, “The American people deserve a citizenship system that cannot be exploited by anyone with just a plane ticket. Congress must act, and I will lead that fight.”

Representative Randy Fine (R-FL) declared, “The Supreme Court has turned its back on the American people. Roberts and Barrett have sided with the Left to protect birthright citizenship for the children of foreign invaders.” He added, “This is how our country is being conquered from within. This is our land. Not theirs.”

Senator Jim Banks (R-IN) stated, “A nation without borders is not a nation,” adding that Congress should pass the ‘SAVE America Act,’ tighten border security, and end what he termed the ‘H-1B scam.’”

Representative Keith Self (R-TX) labeled the ruling “disastrous for every true American citizen, our national sovereignty, and the future of our nation,” adding, “The Supreme Court has failed us. Congress must act.”

Representative Chip Roy (R-TX) argued that the court “failed the American people, the Constitution, and the rule of law,” though he dismissed the argument that a constitutional amendment is necessary.

Instead, Roy urged Congress to use legislation to clearly define the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the 14th Amendment, and to restrict federal funding for any government agency that provides legal status or documentation to those he identified as not being subject to that clause.

On the other hand, Representative Mike Lawler (R-NY) offered a different perspective for a Republican, stating that the ruling “confirms that anyone born in the United States is, for all intents and purposes, a citizen of our country,” describing it as a “logically sound and carefully considered” opinion.

Lawler argued that any attempt to change birthright citizenship “would require a constitutional amendment and the decision of an overwhelming majority of Americans,” and that Congress should address the issue of birth tourism “through the legislative process, not through unilateral administrative decisions or judicial activism.”

U.S. NNP = Hong Seong-gu, Lead Reporter / NNP Special Correspondent info@newsandpost.com