One of the Trump administration’s highest-profile legal battles has reached another major turning point after a key deadline passed without further action from the White House.
The development marks the latest chapter in a dispute that has drawn national attention and could continue shaping the debate over immigration and constitutional law.
Advertisement
The case has centered on one of the most closely watched executive actions of President Donald Trump’s second term and prompted extensive legal challenges from states, advocacy groups, and constitutional scholars.
While the administration had indicated it planned to continue fighting the issue, a procedural deadline has now come and gone.
Advertisement
The Supreme Court has issued its certified judgment in the birthright citizenship case after the Trump administration did not file a petition asking the justices to rehear their decision within the court’s required time frame.
The court’s ruling, issued at the end of June, left in place a lower court order blocking enforcement of Trump’s executive order seeking to deny automatic U.S. citizenship to certain children born in the United States to parents who are in the country unlawfully or temporarily.
Advertisement
Following that decision, Trump announced on Truth Social that he intended to ask the Supreme Court to reconsider the case.
“I will be asking for a Rehearing by the United States Supreme Court, IMMEDIATELY,” Trump wrote at the time.
He also criticized the ruling, writing, “This miscarriage of justice will destroy America if they don’t change their absolutely insane decision.”
However, no petition for rehearing was filed before the deadline expired.
Under the Supreme Court’s normal procedures, the clerk issues a certified judgment after the period for seeking rehearing has passed, formally concluding that phase of the case unless additional legal proceedings are initiated through another avenue.
According to SCOTUSblog, the certified judgment is typically issued about 32 days after the court’s opinion when no rehearing petition is filed.
The Supreme Court’s decision leaves intact the lower court ruling that blocked Trump’s executive order from taking effect while the broader legal dispute continues.
Advertisement
The White House did not immediately comment after the certified judgment was issued.
Although Trump had publicly pledged to seek another review, legal experts have long viewed rehearing petitions as extremely unlikely to succeed because they require the support of a majority of the justices after at least one member of the original majority changes position.
The Supreme Court rarely grants rehearing requests in argued cases, making such petitions one of the least common forms of relief available before the court.
Advertisement
🚨 The Supreme Court has issued its judgment in the birthright citizenship case. The Court held that children born in the U.S. to parents present unlawfully or temporarily are citizens at birth.
Despite President Trump’s announcement, the United States did not seek rehearing. pic.twitter.com/fxfqcRckpt
— SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) August 3, 2026
The June decision revealed divisions among the justices over the legal issues involved.
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented from the court’s ruling, while Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed with the majority’s judgment but also wrote separately to explain his reasoning on portions of the case.
Following the decision, Trump argued that Congress could pass legislation addressing birthright citizenship rather than pursuing a constitutional amendment.
Advertisement
However, many constitutional scholars argue that the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment has long been understood to guarantee birthright citizenship for nearly everyone born on U.S. soil, and they believe that any major change to that constitutional protection would likely require either a constitutional amendment or a future Supreme Court decision adopting a different interpretation.
While the administration’s decision not to seek rehearing closes this chapter of the litigation, the broader debate over birthright citizenship is unlikely to end, as immigration policy and the scope of the 14th Amendment are expected to remain major legal and political issues in the years ahead.
This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.
