Key Takeaways

• The Supreme Court rejected President Trump’s executive order limiting birthright citizenship, reaffirming protections under the 14th Amendment.
• The justices upheld state laws restricting transgender girls and women from female school sports teams.
• The court allowed Mississippi to count certain mail-in ballots received after Election Day, preserving existing grace periods.

The Supreme Court closed out its term with a series of decisions that could shape how millions of people experience citizenship, voting access, and civil rights protections across the country.

On Tuesday (June 30), the justices rejected President Donald Trump’s attempt to restrict birthright citizenship, delivering a major defeat to one of his central immigration policies. In Trump v. Barbara, the court blocked an executive order that directed federal agencies not to recognize the citizenship of certain children born in the United States if neither parent was a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.

The 6-3 ruling that struck down Trump’s birthright citizenship order centered on the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause, which states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” are citizens. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the court, said children born in the U.S. to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present are still “subject to the jurisdiction” of the country and are citizens at birth.

The decision leaned heavily on United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the landmark 1898 ruling that recognized birthright citizenship for children born on U.S. soil, including children of foreign nationals. Roberts wrote that, in the 128 years since that decision, the court has “repeatedly understood” the Wong Kim Ark ruling to guarantee citizenship to children born in the United States and subject to its power.

“We see no reason to depart from that view today,” Roberts wrote.

In a statement, NAACP President and CEO Derrick Johnson said Trump’s attempted challenge to the amendment was “dealt a major blow” and described the decision as “a powerful affirmation of the Constitution and the enduring promise of equality it represents.” The civil rights organization also tied the ruling back to the amendment’s post-Civil War origins, noting that birthright citizenship was established to ensure that formerly enslaved people and their descendants would be recognized as full citizens.

The 14th Amendment’s history sits at the center of the ruling

The case carried major historical weight. The 14th Amendment was ratified after the Civil War and was designed in part to overturn Dred Scott v. Sandford, the 1857 Supreme Court decision that declared people of African descent could not be U.S. citizens. In the new ruling, the court’s syllabus noted that Dred Scott embraced the idea that “blood, not soil, determined citizenship,” a view the 14th Amendment later rejected.

Trump signed the birthright citizenship executive order on Jan. 20, 2025, the first day of his second term. His administration argued that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” excluded children born to parents who were in the country unlawfully or whose presence was lawful but temporary, including some students and workers on visas. The challengers argued that the order violated both the Constitution and federal citizenship law.

Reuters reported that experts estimated the order could have affected the legal status of as many as 250,000 babies born each year and could have required millions of families to prove the citizenship status of their newborns.

The nation's highest court also closed out its term with a major ruling on transgender student-athletes. In West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox, the justices upheld laws in West Virginia and Idaho that bar transgender girls and women from female sports teams at public schools, including universities.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the opinion for the court, saying that states may maintain women’s and girls’ sports for “biological females” and determine eligibility based on “biological sex.” The justices unanimously agreed that the laws do not violate Title IX, the federal civil rights law that bans sex discrimination in education. The nine-member court divided 6-3 on whether the laws violate the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, with the conservative majority siding with the states and allowing the restrictions to remain in effect.

The ruling overturned lower court decisions that sided with the transgender students challenging the bans. According to the court’s opinion, 27 states and several sports-governing bodies have adopted similar restrictions.

Voting access also shaped the court’s final stretch

The rulings came one day after the court issued another closely watched decision involving mail-in ballots. In Watson v. Republican National Committee, the justices upheld Mississippi’s ability to count absentee ballots that are postmarked by Election Day and received up to five business days later.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, said federal statutes do not require ballots to be received by Election Day. The court described Mississippi as one of roughly 30 states that count at least some absentee ballots mailed by Election Day but received afterward.

The decision rejected a challenge brought by the Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, and others, who argued that federal law required ballots in federal elections to be both cast and received by Election Day. The opinion described the question before it as narrow, saying it was not deciding the broader legality of absentee voting, early voting, or post-Election Day ballot counting.

Taken together, the cases show how much of American public life is being decided through the courts. The birthright citizenship ruling affects who is recognized as American at birth. The voting decision affects how states can count ballots from people who rely on mail-in voting, including elderly voters, disabled voters, military voters, students, and people living abroad. The transgender sports ruling gives states more power to restrict participation by transgender students in school athletics.

For immigrant families, voters, and LGBTQIA+ students, the impact of this Supreme Court term will extend far beyond Washington.