Following the Supreme Court’s 6–3 ruling to uphold birthright citizenship in Trump v. Barbara, law professor and FOX News contributor Jonathan Turley stated that the political and legal battle over the policy will now shift directly to the American electorate and the legislative branch.
Appearing on FOX News on Tuesday, Turley characterized the ruling as a definitive judicial baseline, though he acknowledged the deep divisions and historical debates surrounding the Fourteenth Amendment.
“It is a roaring decision in favor of birthright citizenship as contained within the 14th Amendment,” Turley said. “That is despite the countervailing evidence of some of the drafters of that amendment that they did not want this to be something that would cover birthright citizenship. Now, having said that, there are very good arguments on both sides here, good-faith arguments.”
Turley praised the majority opinion delivered by Chief Justice John Roberts as a “very comprehensive and good-faith argument,” but he emphasized that the ruling effectively passes the ultimate policy decision to the country’s lawmakers.
“What is left here is a decision for the country as to whether it wants to examine a constitutional amendment,” Turley noted. “Some countries that have had birthright citizenship got rid of it, because many of us believe it’s an incredibly ill-considered policy.”
The focus on a legislative or constitutional solution highlights a critical opening within the high court’s fractured opinions. While Chief Justice Roberts anchored the majority holding that the Fourteenth Amendment covers children of undocumented or temporary immigrants, Justice Brett Kavanaugh issued a distinct separate opinion.
Kavanaugh agreed that the executive branch overstepped its bounds but explicitly noted that Congress retains the authority to amend federal immigration statutes, such as 8 U.S.C. §1401(a), to establish citizenship exceptions.
This legislative avenue quickly became the focal point for real-time reactions across the country, matching Turley’s assessment of the path forward. Speaking live from a retirement community in Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis noted that the entire weight of the decision depended on whether the court issued an absolute constitutional ban on changes or simply a procedural block on executive orders.
DeSantis told the crowd at The Villages that the amendment was originally meant to reverse post-Civil War racial injustices rather than protect modern birth tourism. “If they said, can’t do it through executive order, but you can do it through Congress… at least you have an avenue where you can run on this,” DeSantis said, warning that an absolute constitutional ban on any limits would be “devastating.”
Missouri Senator Eric Schmitt moved swiftly to act on the exact opening highlighted by Turley and Kavanaugh.
Denouncing the ruling as dangerous for American sovereignty, Schmitt announced he is preparing both a long-term constitutional amendment and an immediate bill designed to test the legislative pathway. Schmitt stated that “Justice Kavanaugh may have left Congress a door” and confirmed he is filing legislation to walk through it.
READ: Missouri Sen. Eric Schmitt Vows Constitutional Amendment After Supreme Court Citizenship Ruling
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.
