SCOTUS Rarely Grants Rehearings, Birthright Citizenship Case Highlights
SCOTUS upheld birthright citizenship 6-3 and faces a rare rehearing request.
Why it matters: Understanding the rarity of Supreme Court rehearings offers legal professionals insight into the court's procedural dynamics. The birthright citizenship ruling shapes ongoing constitutional debates on immigration rights.
- On June 30, 2026, SCOTUS ruled 6-3 to uphold birthright citizenship.
- Chief Justice Roberts authored the majority opinion citing the 14th Amendment.
- The dissenters argued original intent did not include children of undocumented immigrants.
- SCOTUS has granted a rehearing only once since 1965; Trump seeks one now.
On June 30, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship in a 6-3 decision, striking down former President Donald Trump's executive order that aimed to end citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants and certain visa holders. The ruling reaffirmed the constitutional protection under the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to nearly all persons born on U.S. soil.
Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion, emphasizing that "citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights—to freely participate in our political community." He noted the Framers intended the 14th Amendment to extend that promise to "every free-born person in this land." Roberts' opinion is detailed here.
In dissent, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh contended that the original understanding of the 14th Amendment did not grant automatic citizenship to children of undocumented immigrants. Justice Alito described the majority's ruling as a "major error." The dissenters expressed these views in their dissent.
The executive order would have impacted more than 250,000 newborns annually, including those born to legal residents. Former President Trump strongly condemned the decision, calling it a "miscarriage of justice" and signaling his intent to request a rehearing—a move notably rare in Supreme Court history, as the Court has granted a rehearing only once since 1965. Trump's reaction and rehearing intent are discussed here.
This case illustrates both the enduring constitutional debates around immigration and citizenship, and the strategic procedural decisions within the Supreme Court. Legal professionals and scholars benefit from understanding the exceptional nature of rehearings, which rarely alter final judgments but can offer signals on the Court's openness to revisiting critical issues.
By the numbers:
- 6-3 — Supreme Court decision to uphold birthright citizenship on June 30, 2026
- Over 250,000 — newborns potentially affected annually by Trump's executive order
- 1 — times Supreme Court has granted a rehearing since 1965
Yes, but: While rehearings are rare, the Court's willingness to entertain them can vary based on case significance and external pressures; however, success is uncommon.
What's next: Former President Trump plans to formally request a rehearing, which the Supreme Court may decide to grant or deny in the coming months.