What’s at Stake in the Supreme Court’s Birthright Citizenship Case? Attorney Josh Kolsrud Weighs In

On May 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in a challenge to President Trump’s 2018 executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship for children born on American soil to parents who are not legally present in the country. Defense attorney Josh Kolsrud joined Arizona’s Family News Anchors to break down the high–stakes constitutional questions and broader implications of the case.

Background: A 125-Year-Old Precedent

Since the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, any child born “in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” has automatically become a U.S. citizen. In the first hours of his presidency, President Trump signed an order seeking to overturn that long–standing rule. Multiple federal district courts enjoined enforcement of the order, setting the stage for today’s Supreme Court showdown.

Three Big Questions Before the Court

Josh Kolsrud highlights that the justices must grapple with at least three interrelated issues:

1. The Scope of Birthright Citizenship • Can a president unilaterally rewrite the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of citizenship by birth? • Or does the power to define those terms lie exclusively with Congress under Article I of the Constitution?
2. Presidential vs. Judicial Power • Have district court judges overstepped by issuing nationwide injunctions that block a president from enforcing his executive orders? • Chief Justice John Roberts signaled interest in clarifying whether one trial court judge can halt a policy across the entire nation.
3. The Balance of Branch Powers • What is the proper boundary between presidential authority and congressional lawmaking when it comes to fundamental rights like citizenship? • If the Court sides with the president, could future administrations similarly bypass Congress on major policy questions?

Why It Matters: Millions Could Become “Stateless”

Kolsrud emphasizes the human stakes at play: “If the Supreme Court rules that birthright citizenship is no longer automatic, you’re literally going to have millions of Americans who become stateless—they don’t have a country.” He calls the potential fallout “huge, magnanimous” and warns that a ruling in favor of the executive order could alter the national landscape of immigration, civil rights, and constitutional governance for generations.

A Landmark Decision Expected by Summer

Given the case’s complexity and significance, observers expect a thorough deliberation. Traditionally, the court issues its final opinions by late June or early July. Kolsrud notes, “They’ll get to it, and we’ll probably have a decision by the end of the summer.”

What Comes Next

A ruling in favor of the executive order would represent one of the most dramatic expansions of presidential power in modern history—and a constriction of the 14th Amendment’s promise. Conversely, a decision striking down the order would reaffirm Congress’s sole authority to define the terms of citizenship and check potential judicial overreach.

As the Supreme Court moves toward a decision, Josh Kolsrud’s analysis serves as a timely reminder that the outcome will not only settle a hotly contested immigration policy but also clarify the separation of powers at the core of our constitutional democracy. We’ll continue to follow this case and report on its implications for birthright citizenship, executive authority, and the rights of future generations.