Alito slams birthright decision as ‘serious mistake’

Court Battles Alito slams birthright decision as ‘serious mistake’ Comments: by Sarah Davis - 06/30/26 2:09 PM ET Comments: Link copied by Sarah Davis - 06/30/26 2:09 PM ET Comments: Link copied

NOW PLAYING

Justice Samuel Alito expressed discontent with the Supreme Court’s Tuesday decision to strike down the Trump administration’s restrictions on birthright citizenship, calling the ruling both “one of the most important decisions” in the court’s history and “a serious mistake” in a dissenting opinion.

The high court ruled 6-3 that an executive order signed by President Trump on Day 1 of his second term violated the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which guarantees automatic citizenship for almost all children who are born on U.S. soil regardless of their parents’ citizenship status.

The Trump administration has sought to restrict citizenship to children with at least one parent with citizenship or permanent legal status.

Alito warned in his dissent the ruling could have “grotesque results,” including an encouragement of “birth tourism,” and national security ramifications.

“If the Fourteenth Amendment required these results, the country would have to live with them or amend the Constitution,” he wrote. “But the Fourteenth Amendment does not include the rule the Court now imposes on the country.

“In my judgment, the Court has made a mistake that will seriously affect the country’s future,” he continued.

Alito accused the majority opinion of relying “on precedent that glosses the text” of the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause and that their argument “fails on textualist grounds.”

The conservative justice specifically pointed to the 14th Amendment’s reference to a person who is “subject to the jurisdiction of,” arguing that the court’s majority failed to consider issues of dual citizenship.

“A great many persons who are born here to illegal immigrant parents fail this test because at birth they are automatically made nationals of their parents’ native country and, as a result, incur duties to that country,” Alito wrote. “This means that they are ‘subject to a foreign power’ and are thus not ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ of the United States within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Alito also cited “birth tourism” in his dissent, which refers to the practice of foreign pregnant women who travel to the U.S. to obtain citizenship for their children. Republican lawmakers, including House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), have used this argument to push for further restrictions on birthright citizenship.

“Careful analysis of the text of the Fourteenth Amendment and the process that led to its adoption shows that it does not degrade the concept of United States citizenship in this way,” Alito wrote. “Instead, the Fourteenth Amendment confers citizenship on only those children who, at birth, owe allegiance solely to this country.”

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority, joined by conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett — a Trump appointee — and the court’s three liberal justices.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Alito all dissented. Justice Brett Kavanaugh disagreed with the court’s ruling, but he voted to block the administration’s executive order under federal law.

Add as preferred source on Google Tags Amy Coney Barrett Brett Kavanaugh Clarence Thomas John Roberts Mike Johnson Neil Gorsuch Samuel Alito

Comments: Link copied