Senate, House Democrats File Brief To Supreme Court Defending Birthright Citizenship Against Trump Attacks

In an amicus brief, Durbin, Rosen lead 216 Democratic colleagues in calling on the justices to uphold precedent and guarantee citizenship to children born in America in Trump v. Barbara

WASHINGTON - U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and U.S. Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV) led a group of 216 House and Senate Democrats in filing a bicameral amicus brief standing up for the essential constitutional principle of birthright citizenship in Trump v. Barbara, currently before the Supreme Court with oral arguments scheduled for April 1, 2026.

The Democratic lawmakers argue that President Donald Trump's week-one executive order to strip the guarantee of citizenship provided to children born in America violates the Constitution and over a century of Supreme Court rulings, as well as laws enacted by the Congress.

As the Trump administration's cruel and reckless immigration policy continues to inflict chaos on communities across the country, the lawmakers affirmed that the Fourteenth Amendment provides Congress with authority to enforce the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship.

"The Fourteenth Amendment sets out a constitutional minimum-a floor-for birthright citizenship. At a minimum, birthright citizenship must extend to all 'persons born…in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.' But the Fourteenth Amendment does not set out a ceiling. Congress is free to confer birthright citizenship more broadly, to people who do not have citizenship by virtue of the constitutional text," the lawmakers wrote.

The lawmakers also argued that the administration's interpretation of birthright citizenship is legally incoherent, outlining how the order would affect the children of asylum seekers and warning that 1.8 million U.S. citizens born to two unauthorized parents could be at risk of retroactively losing their citizenship.

The lawmakers continued: "This incoherence is all the more concerning because-should the Administration prevail in this litigation-millions of Americans will suddenly no longer be citizens. The Administration states that it intends to enforce its views only prospectively. But should the Court endorse the Administration's interpretations, millions of Americans will simply no longer meet the constitutional and statutory criteria for citizenship. Statutory law will therefore bar them from voting, securing passports, and more. The Administration cannot change that by announcing that it will (for now) treat those erstwhile Americans as if they were citizens, giving them benefits the law forbids them to have."

The lawmakers concluded by criticizing the administration for unilaterally disregarding the nation's immigration and naturalization laws, particularly the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (the "INA").

"Beginning over thirty years ago, opponents of birthright citizenship have striven to change the law by constitutional means-the democratic process of introducing bills in Congress both to amend the INA, and to begin the process of constitutional amendment. Those efforts having failed, the President now seeks to attain his goals by unilateral executive fiat. Rather than trying to persuade Congress to exercise its authority to amend or repeal the INA, he seeks to evade that process with an unconstitutional power grab," concluded the lawmakers.

The full brief is available here.

-30-