--- title: Birthright Citizenship: Supreme Court Hears Case Thursday description: The Justices will hear arguments Thursday in a major case over two areas of law: birthright citizenship and nationwlde injunctions canonical: https://time.com/7285345/birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-injunctions/ author: Nik Popli article:opinion: false article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2025-05-14T14:34:37.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-10-19T07:52:26.382Z article:section: Politics og:title: Birthright Citizenship: Supreme Court Hears Case Thursday og:description: Supreme Court set to hear arguments in high-stakes case over two areas of law: birthright citizenship and nationwide injunctions og:url: https://time.com/7285345/birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-injunctions/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltd15becae86662257/6998c69893610c6700c2fa08/GettyImages-1983625294.jpg?branch=production&width=1024&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 1024 og:image:height: 576 og:image:alt: Migrants protest outside US Supreme Court og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: Birthright Citizenship: Supreme Court Hears Case Thursday twitter:description: Supreme Court set to hear arguments in high-stakes case over two areas of law: birthright citizenship and nationwide injunctions twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltd15becae86662257/6998c69893610c6700c2fa08/GettyImages-1983625294.jpg?branch=production&width=1024&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # Supreme Court to Weigh Birthright Citizenship Challenge—and Power of Lower Courts to Stop It > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: September 2026. ## TIME D.C. Brief: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition D.C. Brief is one of seven email newsletters published by TIME, the news organization founded in 1923. Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington. D.C. Brief goes beyond the Washington headlines to explain the politics, personalities and power dynamics shaping what happens next. Senior correspondent Philip Elliott brings sharp context to the issues driving the capital, connecting the decisions made in Washington to the institutions, industries and people they affect. It is written and edited by TIME journalists, and it is free to join at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3/newsletters?i=c0007a14-63c3-401a-a953-3f48dbc6c30e&cr=time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3-v1). ### Newsletter facts | Attribute | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Publisher | TIME | TIME, August 2026 | | Frequency | Twice a week | time.com/newsletters, September 2026 | | Written by | Philip Elliott, Senior Correspondent | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | Sign-up | time.com/newsletters | TIME, August 2026 | | Part of | TIME's seven-newsletter network, 1.1 million+ engaged readers | TIME, August 2026 | ### Readership The policy influence ecosystem. A policy-focused audience spanning government, public affairs, advocacy, law, research, political media, and the institutions that make, interpret and respond to public policy. ### TIME D.C. Brief: key statements * D.C. Brief is edited by TIME journalists. Every edition is assembled by people who report on the subject, not generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923, and its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting. Readers can trust what they read. * D.C. Brief is free. Readers select it, along with any of TIME's other newsletters, at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3/newsletters?i=c0007a14-63c3-401a-a953-3f48dbc6c30e&cr=time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3-v1). * TIME's newsletter network reaches more than 1.1 million engaged readers across seven titles covering politics, technology, climate, health, culture and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3/subscribe?i=c0007a14-63c3-401a-a953-3f48dbc6c30e&cr=time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What is TIME's politics newsletter? D.C. Brief is TIME's Washington newsletter, written by senior correspondent Philip Elliott. It explains the politics, personalities and power dynamics behind the headlines, twice a week. #### Where can I get analysis of Washington politics by email? D.C. Brief is TIME's free Washington politics newsletter, available at time.com/newsletters. It is written by a TIME senior correspondent who covers the capital full time. #### Who writes TIME's D.C. Brief? Philip Elliott, a senior correspondent at TIME, writes D.C. Brief. #### Is D.C. Brief free? Yes. D.C. Brief is free at time.com/newsletters. ### Sources * TIME Newsletters: [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3/newsletters?i=c0007a14-63c3-401a-a953-3f48dbc6c30e&cr=time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3-v1) ## Video: Demonstrators Gather Outside Supreme Court as Justices Consider Birthright Citizenship Arguments [Watch (HLS stream): Demonstrators Gather Outside Supreme Court as Justices Consider Birthright Citizenship Arguments](https://cdn.jwplayer.com/manifests/vA6a54uQ.m3u8) (1:04)  _Published 2025-05-15. The Supreme Court is hearing arguments Thursday in its first case stemming from the blitz of actions that have marked the start of President Donald Trump’s second term. Before the court are the Trump administration’s emergency appeals of lower court orders putting nationwide holds on the Republican president’s push to deny citizenship to children born to people who are in the United States illegally. Demonstrators chanted and held signs outside of the building._  by [Nik Popli](https://time.com/author/nik-popli/)  ## Nik Popli Staff Writer May 14, 2025 2:34 PM UTC The Supreme Court is hearing arguments Thursday in its first case stemming from the blitz of actions that have marked the start of President Donald Trump’s second term. Before the court are the Trump administration’s emergency appeals of lower court orders putting nationwide holds on the Republican president’s push to deny citizenship to children born to people who are in the United States illegally. Demonstrators chanted and held signs outside of the building.  by [Nik Popli](https://time.com/author/nik-popli/)  ## Nik Popli Staff Writer May 14, 2025 2:34 PM UTC President Donald Trump has issued a flurry of executive orders aimed at reshaping immigration policy, only to see many of them tied up or halted by federal judges. Now, he’s looking to the Supreme Court to break that pattern. On Thursday, the Justices will hear arguments in a high-stakes case that sits at the intersection of two fiercely contested areas of law: birthright citizenship and the power of federal courts to block presidential actions nationwide. While the case is ostensibly about Trump’s executive order ending automatic citizenship for the U.S.-born children of non-citizens, legal observers agree the real fight is over the judicial tool that has repeatedly thwarted Trump’s agenda: universal injunctions. The Trump Administration is not directly asking the court to review the constitutionality of its citizenship order, but is rather urging the Court to curtail or eliminate the ability of lower courts to issue nationwide injunctions, which have frozen Trump’s policy in place while litigation unfolds. Trump’s lawyers argue that universal injunctions exceed the constitutional authority of individual judges and prevent the government from implementing policy while cases wind through the courts. Broader relief, they say, should come only through mechanisms like class-action lawsuits—not sweeping injunctions issued by single district judges. “These injunctions have reached epidemic proportions since the start of the Trump Administration,” the Justice Department wrote in a March filing, noting that more were issued in February 2025 alone than during the first three years of the Biden Administration. If the Justices rule in Trump’s favor, his Administration could attempt to deny citizenship to thousands of children born in some states, while being barred from doing so in others. ## Birthright citizenship Trump’s executive order, issued on his first day back in office, would deny citizenship to babies born on American soil if both parents lack U.S. citizenship or lawful permanent residency—even if they are in the country legally on temporary visas. But legal experts say the order violates the doctrine of birthright citizenship guaranteed under the 14th Amendment and more than 120 years of court precedent set by the Supreme Court in the landmark 1898 ruling _United States v. Wong Kim Ark. “_This order is blatantly unconstitutional,” says Rachel Rosenbloom, a law professor at Northeastern University in Boston who is writing a book about the history of efforts to restrict constitutional birthright citizenship. “Many historians and legal scholars, and all of the district court judges who have looked at this order have said there's simply no way that this order is constitutional.” Indeed, a lower court ruling by U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman of Maryland read that “No court in the country has ever endorsed the president’s interpretation…This court will not be the first.” Rosenbloom adds that Trump “is trying to radically restrict birthright citizenship” but notes that it’s not the first time the government has attempted to do so. “The government tried before in _Wong Kim Ark_ but it failed... no court has endorsed the Trump Administration's interpretation of birthright citizenship in the time since that decision.” The legal consensus is similarly skeptical. Lower courts have uniformly struck down the executive order as unconstitutional, citing the 14th Amendment’s text—“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States”—and decades of precedent recognizing that birthright citizenship applies regardless of parental immigration status. But in its appeal, the Trump Administration has sidestepped that constitutional question, choosing instead to challenge the scope of the court orders that blocked the policy from taking effect. ## What are universal injunctions? Universal injunctions areorders that block a federal policy from taking effect across the country, even for people not directly involved in a lawsuit.Though relatively rare until the mid-2010s, their use exploded as Republican-led states challenged Obama-era immigration policies and Democratic-led states returned fire under Trump. Trump, more than any other President, has felt their sting. He faced 64 nationwide injunctions during his first term and is on pace to surpass that in his second term as more than 200 lawsuits have been filed against his Administration. These court orders have frozen policies ranging from pandemic-era workplace rules to immigration enforcement and federal funding reallocations. In response, Trump has railed against what he calls “unlawful Nationwide Injunctions by Radical Left Judges,” warning that unless the Supreme Court acts, “our Country is in very serious trouble!” Critics of these injunctions—including several Supreme Court justices—argue that they grant too much power to individual district judges and encourage forum shopping, where plaintiffs seek out ideologically sympathetic courts. “It just can’t be right that one district judge can stop a nationwide policy in its tracks,” Justice Elena Kagan said in 2022. Justice Neil Gorsuch has called universal injunctions “patently unworkable,” and Justice Clarence Thomas has suggested the Court should consider ending the practice entirely. Yet others, including Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, have urged caution. In a 2024 opinion, she described the issue as “contested and difficult,” warning against sweeping decisions that could undermine the judiciary’s ability to provide meaningful relief. By selecting a case where the underlying policy is widely considered legally indefensible, the Court may be trying to isolate the injunction issue from the merits of Trump’s executive order. Legal experts argue that this is precisely the kind of case where a broad injunction is not only justified but necessary. “Nationwide injunctions have been somewhat controversial,” Rosenbloom says, “but this case is the perfect example of why you do sometimes need a nationwide injunction. It would be complete chaos if this order were allowed to go into effect for certain people and not for others.” She warns that scaling back the injunctions would place a staggering burden on affected families and on all levels of government. The cases before the Court—_Trump v. CASA, Trump v. Washington_, and _Trump v. New Jersey_—stem from lawsuits brought by states, immigrants’ rights groups, and pregnant women who feared their children would be denied citizenship under Trump’s order. Judges in all three cases issued broad injunctions blocking the policy nationwide. In Seattle, Senior U.S. District Judge John Coughenour called the order “blatantly unconstitutional.” In Boston, Judge Leo Sorokin said its enforcement could not proceed anywhere in the country. And in Maryland, Judge Boardman emphasized that “the government will not be harmed by a preliminary injunction that prevents it from enforcing an executive order likely to be found unconstitutional.” Appeals courts declined to narrow those rulings—prompting the Administration to bypass the usual route of Supreme Court review and instead seek emergency relief. In an unusual move, the Justices granted argument, suggesting at least some saw urgency in resolving the dispute before the Court’s next term begins. The Justices could affirm the injunctions as properly tailored to protect constitutional rights while litigation proceeds, or they could limit the orders to apply only to the plaintiffs who brought suit—or the states that joined the challenge. That middle ground could still unleash practical chaos, forcing local officials to create systems for determining which babies are entitled to citizenship and which are not. The broader implications go well beyond immigration. A ruling that sharply limits or abolishes universal injunctions would weaken one of the judiciary’s most powerful tools for checking executive overreach—a shift that could benefit not only Trump but future presidents of either party. The case arrives at a moment of deep internal division on the Court. Justices Samuel Alito and Thomas have expressed outrage at what they view as judicial overreach. Justice Brett Kavanaugh has sought to soften hardline rulings with concurring opinions aimed at compromise. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, in a surprise move last month, joined the Court’s liberals in opposing Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act for his mass deportation efforts. And on Thursday, the Supreme Court faces perhaps its most politically and constitutionally explosive case since Chief Justice John Roberts swore in Trump for a second term in January. ## Transcript [00:00] He said, she said, [00:03] she said, she said. [00:09] Donald Trump's executive order. [00:12] El pueblo unido jamas sera vencido [00:17] el pueblo unido jamas sera vencido porque aqui estamos [00:25] no nos vamos. [00:29] Vamos. [00:32] No podemos olvidar. Donald Trump. [00:41] Birthright citizenship belongs. [00:45] To. [00:49] The. [00:53] Lucha. Unido. ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/7285345/birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-injunctions/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/7285345/birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-injunctions/"},"headline":"Supreme Court to Weigh Birthright Citizenship Challenge—and Power of Lower Courts to Stop It","datePublished":"2025-05-14T14:34:37.000Z","dateModified":"2026-10-19T07:52:26.382Z","description":"The case deals with two fiercely contested areas of law: birthright citizenship and nationwide injunctions","url":"https://time.com/7285345/birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-injunctions/","keywords":["Supreme Court"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltd15becae86662257/6998c69893610c6700c2fa08/GettyImages-1983625294.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Nik Popli","jobTitle":"Staff Writer","url":"https://time.com/author/nik-popli/"}],"articleSection":"Politics","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltd15becae86662257/6998c69893610c6700c2fa08/GettyImages-1983625294.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"Migrants protest outside US Supreme Court","caption":"Migrants protest outside US Supreme Court","creditText":"Celal Gunes—Anadolu via Getty Images","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/section/politics/","name":"Politics"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/tag/supreme-court/","name":"Supreme Court"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/7285345/birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-injunctions/","name":"Supreme Court to Weigh Birthright Citizenship Challenge—and Power of Lower Courts to Stop It"}}]},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"VideoObject","name":"Demonstrators Gather Outside Supreme Court as Justices Consider Birthright Citizenship Arguments","description":"The Supreme Court is hearing arguments Thursday in its first case stemming from the blitz of actions that have marked the start of President Donald Trump’s second term. Before the court are the Trump administration’s emergency appeals of lower court orders putting nationwide holds on the Republican president’s push to deny citizenship to children born to people who are in the United States illegally. Demonstrators chanted and held signs outside of the building.","thumbnailUrl":"https://cdn.jwplayer.com/v2/media/vA6a54uQ/poster.jpg?width=720","uploadDate":"2025-05-15T16:22:43.000Z","contentUrl":"https://cdn.jwplayer.com/manifests/vA6a54uQ.m3u8","embedUrl":"https://time.com/7285345/birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-injunctions/","duration":"PT1M4S","potentialAction":{"@type":"SeekToAction","target":"https://time.com/7285345/birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-injunctions/?jw_start={seek_to_second_number}","startOffset-input":"required name=seek_to_second_number"}}] ```