Supreme Court to Hear Landmark Birthright Citizenship Case

Idaho Attorney General backs Trump's executive order challenging current interpretation

Mar. 31, 2026 at 10:20pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments in the case Trump v. Barbara, a legal battle challenging President Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship. Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador has joined 23 other states in an amicus brief supporting the executive order, arguing the current interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause is legally flawed.

Why it matters

The case could have far-reaching implications for immigration policy and the legal status of millions of U.S. residents. A ruling in favor of the Trump administration could significantly restrict birthright citizenship, a bedrock principle of American law for over a century.

The details

The legal battle centers on the exact phrasing of the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause, which reads: 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.' Labrador argues the phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' requires more than just physical presence, asserting parents must be lawful residents for their children to be born citizens. The ACLU maintains the Supreme Court already settled this issue in the 1898 case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which established the current interpretation of automatic citizenship for those born on U.S. soil.

  • The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on April 1, 2026.
  • The case is the result of a class action lawsuit filed by the ACLU in October 2025.

The players

Raúl Labrador

The Attorney General of Idaho, who has joined 23 other states in an amicus brief supporting President Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark

A 1898 Supreme Court case that established the current interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause, granting automatic citizenship to those born on U.S. soil.

Trump v. Barbara

The current Supreme Court case challenging President Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“That second phrase matters. It was added deliberately, and it means something. When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, its primary purpose was clear: to constitutionally protect the citizenship rights of freed slaves after the Civil War.”

— Raúl Labrador, Idaho Attorney General

“Senator Lyman Trumbull, who drafted the related Civil Rights Act of 1866, explicitly stated that the citizenship provision excluded 'persons temporarily resident in [the United States] whom we would have no right to make citizens.'”

— Raúl Labrador, Idaho Attorney General

What’s next

The Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments in the case starting at 10 a.m. ET (8:00 a.m. MST) on April 1, 2026.

The takeaway

This case could have major implications for immigration policy and the legal status of millions of U.S. residents. A ruling in favor of the Trump administration could significantly restrict birthright citizenship, a bedrock principle of American law for over a century.