{"id":4870,"date":"2026-06-30T17:22:18","date_gmt":"2026-06-30T17:22:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/usglobalnews.com\/2026\/06\/30\/us-supreme-court-upholds-birthright-citizenship-in-blow-to-trump-agenda\/"},"modified":"2026-06-30T17:22:18","modified_gmt":"2026-06-30T17:22:18","slug":"us-supreme-court-upholds-birthright-citizenship-in-blow-to-trump-agenda","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.usglobalnews.com\/?p=4870","title":{"rendered":"US supreme court upholds birthright citizenship in blow to Trump agenda"},"content":{"rendered":"<div data-gu-name=\"media\" class=\"dcr-14sl0e4\">\n<div class=\"dcr-17l77cs\">\n<figure id=\"7fa02cb3-0af5-4d89-8222-a26fa9b4e080\" class=\"dcr-191xnya\">\n<div id=\"img-1\" class=\"dcr-1t7hdmw\"><img decoding=\"async\" alt=\"people cheer outside the supreme court\" src=\"https:\/\/i.guim.co.uk\/img\/media\/a4cdfac514cc3bf34bba86b8a93f9ae385b4e983\/545_0_5454_4365\/master\/5454.jpg?width=465&amp;dpr=1&amp;s=none&amp;crop=none\" width=\"465\" height=\"372.15346534653463\" loading=\"eager\" class=\"dcr-up96pv\"><span class=\"dcr-kogzpx\"><\/p>\n<div class=\"dcr-18mnkpm\">\n<div class=\"dcr-1294qmb\"><label for=\"the-checkbox\" class=\"dcr-4sl2vt\"><\/label> <\/p>\n<div id=\"the-caption\"><figcaption data-spacefinder-role=\"inline\" class=\"dcr-1mfxiaj\"><span class=\"dcr-13i4yc9\"><\/span><span class=\"dcr-1cipnsy\">People celebrate after the supreme court rejected Donald Trump\u2019s executive order that attempted to abolish birthright citizenship.<\/span> Photograph: Jim Lo Scalzo\/EPA<\/figcaption><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p><\/span><a href=\"#img-1\" data-ignore=\"global-link-styling\" class=\"open-lightbox dcr-zwabc0\" aria-hidden=\"true\"><button data-element-id=\"7fa02cb3-0af5-4d89-8222-a26fa9b4e080\" type=\"button\" class=\"open-lightbox dcr-1bitgpn\" aria-haspopup=\"dialog\"><span class=\"dcr-1shbixy\">View image in fullscreen<\/span><\/button><\/a><\/div>\n<p><span class=\"dcr-qda0hp\"><figcaption data-spacefinder-role=\"inline\" class=\"dcr-1e9iiy9\"><span class=\"dcr-13i4yc9\"><\/span><span class=\"dcr-1cipnsy\">People celebrate after the supreme court rejected Donald Trump\u2019s executive order that attempted to abolish birthright citizenship.<\/span> Photograph: Jim Lo Scalzo\/EPA<\/figcaption><\/span><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div data-gu-name=\"headline\" class=\"dcr-ql9l8l\">\n<div class=\"dcr-6mja0y\">\n<h1 class=\"dcr-l0wuod\">US supreme court upholds birthright citizenship in blow to Trump agenda<\/h1>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div data-gu-name=\"standfirst\" class=\"dcr-1xpojbf\">\n<div class=\"dcr-1gm5ptv\">\n<p>Court rules againstTrump administration on policy that people born in the United States are citizens<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/live\/2026\/jun\/30\/birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-donald-trump-us-politics-latest-news\" data-link-name=\"in standfirst link\">Supreme court decisions \u2013 live updates<\/a><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/news\/2026\/feb\/17\/sign-up-for-the-breaking-news-us-email-to-get-newsletter-alerts-direct-to-your-inbox?utm_medium=ACQUISITIONS_STANDFIRST&amp;utm_campaign=BN22326&amp;utm_content=signup&amp;utm_term=standfirst&amp;utm_source=GUARDIAN_WEB\" data-link-name=\"in standfirst link\">Sign up for the Breaking News US email<\/a><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div data-gu-name=\"body\" class=\"dcr-x1al2c\">\n<div class=\"dcr-11gq2tx\">\n<div id=\"maincontent\" class=\"dcr-1w2vkyc\">\n<div class=\"article-body-commercial-selector article-body-viewer-selector dcr-ogvvui\">\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/us-supreme-court\" data-link-name=\"in body link\">US supreme court<\/a> has upheld birthright citizenship, which provides nearly all people born in the country with citizenship, ruling against a central piece of Donald Trump\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/usimmigration\" data-link-name=\"in body link\">anti-immigrant agenda<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\u201cChildren born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily present are \u2018subject to the jurisdiction\u2019 of the United States and are citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment\u2019s Citizenship Clause,\u201d the ruling says.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the opinion. He was joined by the liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, and the conservative justice Amy Coney Barrett. The conservative justice Brett Kavanaugh concurred with the judgment but dissented in part. The conservative justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch filed dissenting opinions. The court\u2019s writings in the ruling span 194 pages, nearly 90 of which were written by Thomas in dissent<strong>,<\/strong> his longest in his tenure on the court.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">Trump called the ruling \u201ctoo bad for our Country\u201d, but said US Congress should now take up the matter legislatively, suggesting another avenue to keep the issue alive.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\u201cNo long and unwieldy Constitutional Amendment is necessary! Congress should start TODAY to work on ending expensive and unfair to our Country, Birthright Citizenship,\u201d Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. \u201cThey will have my Complete and Total Support!\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">The president had issued an executive order on the first day of his second term that sought to undo birthright citizenship. The order would override the US constitution, which it cannot do, though his administration has argued the order instead interprets the constitution correctly.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">Trump\u2019s order immediately drew lawsuits, including from Democratic state attorneys general and the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU argued in front of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/us-supreme-court\" data-link-name=\"in body link\" data-component=\"auto-linked-tag\">US supreme court<\/a> on the case during oral arguments in April for Trump v Barbara, a class-action challenge to the order, brought by parents of children who would be affected by the change.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">Dismantling birthright citizenship is a key facet of Trump\u2019s agenda. He filed an executive order to end it on his first day back in office for his second term. He attended the oral arguments in person when the court heard the case, the first time a sitting president had attended oral arguments.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">While the courts deliberated on the case for more than a year, the fate of many thousands of children born in the US to parents without permanent legal status hung in the balance. The order sought to apply the president\u2019s interpretation of citizenship starting on 19 February 2025. The families of those children were part of the lawsuit before the supreme court and noted how the order kept their children\u2019s legal status in limbo.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">Civil rights groups and Democrats celebrated the ruling from the conservative court, calling it one of the most important decisions in the modern era and noting how it affirmed the promise of America.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">The ACLU, whose national legal director, Cecillia Wang, argued the case before the supreme court, called the decision a \u201cmajor victory\u201d.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\u201cThe court\u2019s decision reaffirms a fundamental American promise \u2013 if you are born here, you are a citizen,\u201d Wang said. \u201cA president cannot change the constitution by executive fiat. Our brave clients and our legal team stand with millions of people around our country who spoke up for one of our most cherished rights. The constitution\u2019s guarantee of birthright citizenship stands strong.\u201d<\/p>\n<figure id=\"0cbfb548-6d26-44ad-b8c4-473ab215baf3\" data-spacefinder-role=\"richLink\" data-spacefinder-type=\"model.dotcomrendering.pageElements.RichLinkBlockElement\" class=\"dcr-1oq85qr\">\n<div data-print-layout=\"hide\" data-link-name=\"rich-link-12 | 12\" data-component=\"rich-link\" data-name=\"placeholder\" class=\"dcr-1rx5ky9\">\n<div data-format-theme=\"5\" data-format-design=\"0\" data-format-display=\"0\" class=\"dcr-15vltj4\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/2026\/jun\/30\/supreme-court-spending-political-candidates-ruling\" class=\"dcr-f35c0u\"><\/p>\n<div class=\"dcr-vvxpdt\">\n<div class=\"dcr-6z6e7\">\n<div class=\"dcr-zh9rih\">US supreme court strikes down limits on campaign spending<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"dcr-oj13vq\">\n<div class=\"dcr-ef9nua\">Read more<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p><\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">The NAACP, a civil rights group dedicated to advancing the rights of Black people, called the decision a \u201cpowerful affirmation of the constitution and the enduring promise of equality it represents\u201d. Voto Latino, a non-profit pushing for Latino voting power, said that \u201cthe court drew a permanent line in the sand \u2013 defeating a radical attempt to divide our families and strip away any doubt that our community belongs here\u201d. Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic leader in the US House, noted that the 14th amendment \u201cwithstood the unconstitutional attack launched by <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/donaldtrump\" data-link-name=\"in body link\" data-component=\"auto-linked-tag\">Donald Trump<\/a> and his most sycophantic and xenophobic enablers\u201d.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\u201cOn the eve of America\u2019s 250th birthday, the far-right Maga conservatives have failed in their quest to remake the United States, and American values have prevailed,\u201d Jeffries said.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">Some Republicans have spoken out against the ruling. Mike Johnson, the Republican speaker of the US House, said he was \u201cdisappointed\u201d.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\u201cI do think that this has been grossly abused in recent years,\u201d Johnson said at a press conference. \u201cYou just come on to the soil and have your child, and then they\u2019re able to avail themselves of the welfare state and everything else.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">The supreme court\u2019s Dred Scott decision in 1857 had ruled Black people were not US citizens, but \u201ca separate class of persons\u201d. But the 14th amendment which reversed the Dred Scott decision, was adopted in 1868 during the Reconstruction era after the US civil war, to codify the rights of Black Americans\u2013 and confer citizenship to \u201call persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof\u201d.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">The majority opinion walks through the plain meanings of citizenship, from English common law into slavery and then emancipation, and then into efforts to undermine citizenship, including the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/2025\/jan\/27\/wong-kim-ark-birthright-citizenship\" data-link-name=\"in body link\">Chinese Exclusion Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">Roberts writes that the \u201codious\u201d decision in Dred Scott denied citizenship to Black people, arguing then that it was \u201cblood, not soil\u201d that decided citizenship. That was overturned via the 14th amendment, which the court affirmed on Tuesday in upholding birthright citizenship.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\u201cCitizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights \u2013 to freely participate in our political community,\u201d the majority opinion says. \u201cThe Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to \u2018every free-born person in this land.\u2019 We keep that promise today.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">In her concurring opinion, Jackson writes that the 14th amendment\u2019s \u201cuniversalist aims should forever be the death knell for this kind of claim \u2013 one that seeks to make bloodline the marker of birthright\u201d.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\u201cThe America that was reborn from the rubble of the Civil War simply does not countenance that inequitable result,\u201d she wrote. \u201cThankfully, a majority of the Court remembered this today, and has dutifully preserved the most basic animating principle of our Nation\u2019s founding \u2013 that all human beings are created equal \u2013 once more.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">Thomas writes in his sprawling dissent that Black people were entitled to citizenship because they were Americans with \u201cno other homeland\u201d or allegiance to other nations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\u201cThe same could not be said for the children of foreign temporary visitors,\u201d he writes. \u201cForeign temporary visitors were attached to their home country, lacked similar bonds to this country, and would not be called upon in time of war.\u201d<\/p>\n<figure data-spacefinder-role=\"inline\" data-spacefinder-type=\"model.dotcomrendering.pageElements.NewsletterSignupBlockElement\" class=\"dcr-d9bay7\"><a data-ignore=\"global-link-styling\" href=\"#EmailSignup-skip-link-25\" class=\"dcr-76akua\">skip past newsletter promotion<\/a><\/p>\n<div class=\"dcr-1tr4stg\">\n<div class=\"dcr-12qa5gp\">\n<hr class=\"dcr-1cjdlyj\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p id=\"EmailSignup-skip-link-25\" aria-label=\"after newsletter promotion\" role=\"note\" class=\"dcr-76akua\">after newsletter promotion<\/p>\n<\/figure>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">Kavanaugh writes in a partial concurrence that he does not believe Trump\u2019s executive order violates the 14th amendment, but that it does violate a federal statute. Congress could, he writes, amend the federal statute or create new legislation to establish exceptions to birthright citizenship for children born to parents who do not have permanent legal status in the country.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\u201cBut Congress has not yet done so,\u201d he writes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">Overturning a constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds majority vote of both chambers of Congress, or the legislatures of two-thirds of the states to call for a convention, a much higher bar than passing a new statute. Trump shared an article on Truth Social on Tuesday morning alluding to a statutory process to upend birthright citizenship.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">Alito, in his dissent, called the decision \u201cone of the most important\u201d in the court\u2019s history, but, in his estimation, \u201cthe Court has made a serious mistake\u201d.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">He mentions the idea of \u201cbirth tourists\u201d, or women who come to the US solely to give birth to a child in the country and then return home. He believes the 14th amendment grants citizenship solely to those children who \u201cowe allegiance solely to this country\u201d and argues that this interpretation of the law would not require uprooting the lives of children born here to parents not in the country legally. He, like Kavanaugh, floats the idea of Congress addressing the issue.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\u201cSome members of this group have lived here for years, and they have a strong moral claim to be able to remain in the land where they grew up,\u201d Alito writes. \u201cCongress can and should address their situation. The Fourteenth Amendment dictates who <em>must<\/em> be a citizen, but it does not address who <em>may<\/em> be a citizen by Act of Congress.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">The Trump administration argued the phrase \u201csubject to the jurisdiction thereof\u201d means babies born in the US to people who are not lawfully present in the country are not citizens. The executive order says this includes when neither of a person\u2019s parents were US citizens or lawful permanent residents, or if a parent has legal, but temporary, status. It sought to apply this meaning starting on 19 February 2025, which <a href=\"https:\/\/www.migrationpolicy.org\/news\/birthright-citizenship-repeal-projections\" data-link-name=\"in body link\">would affect<\/a> hundreds of thousands of babies annually.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">D John Sauer, the solicitor general who argued on behalf of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/trump-administration\" data-link-name=\"in body link\" data-component=\"auto-linked-tag\">Trump administration<\/a>, emphasized the concept of \u201cdomicile\u201d, saying those who are here unlawfully or temporarily do not have \u201cdomicile\u201d in the US or allegiance to the country, unlike the formerly enslaved people the 14th amendment\u2019s citizenship clause applied to.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\u201cUnrestricted birthright citizenship contradicts the practice of the overwhelming majority of modern nations,\u201d Sauer said then. \u201cIt demeans the priceless and profound gift of American citizenship.\u201d<\/p>\n<figure id=\"ace9d3fb-b153-4c10-8358-5e8cea219bc0\" data-spacefinder-role=\"richLink\" data-spacefinder-type=\"model.dotcomrendering.pageElements.RichLinkBlockElement\" class=\"dcr-1oq85qr\">\n<div data-print-layout=\"hide\" data-link-name=\"rich-link-35 | 35\" data-component=\"rich-link\" data-name=\"placeholder\" class=\"dcr-1rx5ky9\">\n<div data-format-theme=\"5\" data-format-design=\"0\" data-format-display=\"0\" class=\"dcr-15vltj4\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/2026\/jun\/29\/supreme-court-trump-agency-firings-slaughter-ftc\" class=\"dcr-f35c0u\"><\/p>\n<div class=\"dcr-vvxpdt\">\n<div class=\"dcr-6z6e7\">\n<div class=\"dcr-zh9rih\">Outcry over supreme court decision to grant Trump power to fire agency chiefs<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"dcr-oj13vq\">\n<div class=\"dcr-ef9nua\">Read more<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p><\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">Domicile weighed heavily into the Trump administration\u2019s claims, though the word is not included in the 14th amendment. The landmark decision on birthright citizenship, United States v Wong Kim Ark, said that a child born to parents of Chinese descent who had permanent \u201cdomicile\u201d in the US would be a US citizen at the time of birth under the 14th amendment. The Trump administration <a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/DocketPDF\/25\/25-365\/383785\/20251106155818044_25-365%20Trump%20v.%20Barbara.pdf\" data-link-name=\"in body link\">argued<\/a> \u201cdomicile\u201d, meaning a permanent residence, is a critical part of the interpretation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">The justices were skeptical of the government\u2019s claims during oral arguments. Roberts, the conservative chief justice, at one point referred to part of the government\u2019s argument as \u201cvery quirky\u201d. Liberal justice Kagan said the government was using \u201cpretty obscure sources\u201d to arrive at part of its case.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">In the decision, Roberts wrote that \u201cthe Court exhaustively canvassed the text and history of the Citizenship Clause and at no point identified any evidence that the ratifiers thought themselves to be imposing a domicile limitation\u201d.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">Roberts repeatedly bats down the idea that \u201cdomicile\u201d was much more expansive an idea, and that primary allegiance to the US was commonly seen as part of that definition, both arguments the government tried to make in its case. He writes that \u201cthere is scant evidence for this dramatically revisionist view\u201d.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">The quest to overturn birthright citizenship has gained steam among some conservatives in recent years, though most legal scholars still believe the amendment has been interpreted correctly. The administration is relying in part on the legal arguments of a white supremacists from the late 1800s, the Washington Post <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/politics\/2026\/03\/30\/trump-birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-case\/\" data-link-name=\"in body link\">reported<\/a>. John Eastman, a lawyer who worked with Trump to try to overturn the 2020 election results who has since been disbarred in California, is also a key proponent of the effort to overturn birthright citizenship, Politico <a href=\"https:\/\/www.politico.com\/news\/2026\/03\/31\/birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-john-eastman-00851127\" data-link-name=\"in body link\">reported<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">The court has previously ruled against Trump on his broad emergency tariffs. Trump has repeatedly attacked any courts or judges that side against him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Read more coverage of today\u2019s supreme court rulings:<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\n<li class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/2026\/jun\/30\/us-supreme-court-upholds-laws-trans-women-sports\" data-link-name=\"in body link\">US supreme court rules states can exclude trans athletes from female sports<\/a><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/2026\/jun\/30\/supreme-court-spending-political-candidates-ruling\" data-link-name=\"in body link\">US supreme court strikes down limit on spending by political parties in support of candidates<\/a><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li class=\"dcr-1s160rg\">\n<p class=\"dcr-1s160rg\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/2026\/jun\/30\/us-supreme-court-bithright-citizenship\" data-link-name=\"in body link\">US supreme court upholds birthright citizenship in blow to Trump agenda<\/a><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div data-print-layout=\"hide\" class=\"dcr-swayiu\"><span class=\"dcr-1xhbmzr\">Explore more on these topics<\/span><\/p>\n<div class=\"dcr-2c03t5\">\n<ul class=\"dcr-p7nd18\">\n<li class=\"dcr-r721ee\"><a href=\"\/us-news\/us-supreme-court\" class=\"dcr-856iwi\">US supreme court<\/a><\/li>\n<li class=\"dcr-r721ee\"><a href=\"\/us-news\/usimmigration\" class=\"dcr-856iwi\">US immigration<\/a><\/li>\n<li class=\"dcr-r721ee\"><a href=\"\/us-news\/trump-administration\" class=\"dcr-856iwi\">Trump administration<\/a><\/li>\n<li class=\"dcr-r721ee\"><a href=\"\/us-news\/us-politics\" class=\"dcr-856iwi\">US politics<\/a><\/li>\n<li class=\"dcr-r721ee\"><a href=\"\/us-news\/donaldtrump\" class=\"dcr-856iwi\">Donald Trump<\/a><\/li>\n<li class=\"dcr-r721ee\"><a href=\"\/tone\/news\" class=\"dcr-856iwi\">news<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"dcr-313bdz\"><a href=\"mailto:?subject=US%20supreme%20court%20upholds%20birthright%20citizenship%20in%20blow%20to%20Trump%20agenda&amp;body=https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/2026\/jun\/30\/us-supreme-court-bithright-citizenship?CMP=share_btn_url\" class=\"dcr-ncybeu\">Share<\/a><\/p>\n<div class=\"dcr-19bkree\"><a data-link-name=\"meta-syndication-article\" href=\"https:\/\/syndication.theguardian.com\/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fus-news%2F2026%2Fjun%2F30%2Fus-supreme-court-bithright-citizenship&amp;type=article&amp;internalpagecode=us-news\/2026\/jun\/30\/us-supreme-court-bithright-citizenship\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer\" title=\"Reuse this content\" class=\"dcr-1c41onw\">Reuse this content<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div data-gu-name=\"right-column\" class=\"dcr-axwinp\"><span class=\"dcr-1ryr20k\"><\/span><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>People celebrate after the supreme court rejected Donald Trump\u2019s executive order that attempted to abolish birthright citizenship. Photograph:<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":4872,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4870","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-world-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.usglobalnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4870","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.usglobalnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.usglobalnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.usglobalnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4870"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.usglobalnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4870\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.usglobalnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/4872"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.usglobalnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4870"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.usglobalnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4870"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.usglobalnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4870"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}