The Birthright Citizenship Ruling Is Far Worse Than You Think

Today's Bad Faith Times newsletter is brought to you by Alex Rikleen, a longtime BFT supporter and former U.S. Senate candidate in Massachusetts. BFT covered Alex's Senate run back in June 2025.

The Supreme Court, as usual, has saved its most anticipated rulings for the end of the term.

When the Court holds a case until late June, people naturally assume the question must be difficult, consequential, or close. These cases are treated as blockbusters. But that framing is exactly the problem with Trump v. Barbara, the birthright citizenship case.

Many court watchers expected the Roberts Court to rule against the president's attempt to destroy one of the country's most foundational constitutional rights. Some will treat the outcome as proof that the system worked: Trump tried something outrageous, the courts stopped him, and the Supreme Court showed its independence.

Do not be fooled. Three of the nine SCOTUS justices signed up to end birthright citizenship, a horrifying outcome considering the plain constitutional language involved in the case. The widespread Court dissent against established birthright citizenship precedent was enough for the president to say shortly after the ruling that Congress could now move to end the 14th Amendment.

Alito using plainly white supremacist language in his birthright citizenship opinion is … not great

— Denny Carter (@dennycarter.bsky.social) June 30, 2026 at 10:41 AM

By even considering the legitimacy of birthright citizenship, the Roberts Court, stacked with jurists ready and willing to make anti-constitutional rulings time and again, has helped transform a fringe white supremacist attack on the 14^th Amendment into a question that millions of people now understand as up for debate.

This case was an outrageous miscarriage of justice, even before the final ruling. Simply by allowing it to escalate this far, the right-wing Court majority has granted undeserved legitimacy to one of the Trump administration’s most brazenly lawless efforts, one that has widespread support in white supremacist circles across the US.

Weaponized Colorblindness Killed The Voting Rights Act

The Supreme Court’s conservative justices seem to be asking why we don’t have a White History Month

Bad Faith TimesDenny Carter

The core issue of the birthright citizenship case is not complicated legal doctrine, but rather basic reading comprehension. The 14^th Amendment clearly says that everyone born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction are citizens. Trump wants to deny citizenship to many children born here because their parents don't have the proper documentation or are temporary residents. That violates the text, the amendment’s purpose, and longstanding Supreme Court precedent. Nothing about this case is hard.

The mere fact that the Court had us sitting here in late June thinking about birthright citizenship is already an act of wanton partisanship.

The Belligerent, Bad-Faith Bullshit of SCOTUS’s Major Questions Doctrine

Creating an impenetrable force field through which no progressive public policy could pass was always going to be a two-step process for the American right. And the second step is more infuriating – and for the left, more vexing – than the first. The first step in creating a right-wing

Bad Faith TimesDenny Carter

One of the Court’s most important powers is choosing what it hears. It receives thousands of petitions each year and decides only a small fraction. Usually, the Court takes a case to resolve a split among lower courts or answer a genuinely unsettled constitutional question.

Neither situation applied here.

Lower courts rejected Trump’s position. The text is plain. The precedent is longstanding. There was no serious legal reason to elevate this argument into one of the defining cases of the term.

But the Court did.

The damage is not merely symbolic. The Court has already used this fight to change the law in Trump’s favor.

Last year, in Trump v. CASA, the Court used this same litigation to limit nationwide injunctions while leaving birthright citizenship unresolved. For non-lawyers, that means it became harder for lower courts to block unlawful presidential action nationwide. The conservative majority had permitted nationwide injunctions during the Biden administration, but moved to limit them once they were being used against Trump, even in a case where a district judge called the administration’s actions "blatantly unconstitutional."

So even though Trump technically lost the birthright citizenship battle, he has already won something. His unconstitutional order became the vehicle for weakening one of the tools on which people relied to stop unlawful presidential action before it spreads.

There Is No Law Anymore. There Is Only Power.

To refuse to wield power from the bench is to give up the fight against the right wing.

Bad Faith TimesDenny Carter

That is the deeper pattern of the Roberts Court: Even when Trump loses on the merits, he often leaves with more power than he had before.

By turning an easy case into a late-June spectacle, the conservative majority helped both Trump and itself. It encouraged people to assume the justices had agonized over a complex constitutional dilemma. But there is no dilemma here.

The spectacle serves Trump by dignifying his argument. And if the Court ultimately rules against him, it also serves the conservative majority by giving them a convenient legitimacy story.

After a year undermining voting rights, civil rights, and century-old precedents, the right-wing supermajority gets to end this radical term with a high-profile rebuke to Trump and hope the headlines write themselves: the Court stood up to Trump’s overreach, and the system held.

Many will write that story. But it is a misleading story.

The full story is that Trump took a plainly unconstitutional idea, dragged it to the center of American politics, and the Supreme Court helped him do it. Along the way, the Court used the very same case to weaken a key protection against unlawful presidential power. That is not a healthy constitutional system. It's a very sick one, in fact.

What we have today is an extremist Supreme Court managing appearances while moving power in one direction.

It matters that today's ruling upheld birthright citizenship. The children targeted by this order deserve protection. The 14^th Amendment should still mean what it says.

But SCOTUS does not wield power only through final rulings, and the Court's right-wing operators know this. It wields power through the cases it takes, the questions it dignifies, the decisions it delays, and the procedural damage it does along the way.

That is why this case is already so bad, regardless of the outcome. A ruling against Trump on Tuesday does not erase the Supreme Court’s bad faith jurisprudence and its willingness to annihilate basic constitutional principles. It only comes after the Court helped turn his lawless attack into a debate, used it to weaken checks on presidential power, and carried him farther than he should ever have gone.

Follow Alex Rikleen on Bluesky at @rikleen.bsky.social.