Summary
The Supreme Court issued three significant rulings on the final day of its term, addressing birthright citizenship, transgender athlete participation in school sports, and campaign finance limits for political parties.
Key Decisions
Birthright Citizenship
- In a 6-3 decision, the Court ruled that virtually all children born in the United States are entitled to citizenship under the 14th Amendment. The ruling effectively rejected President Trump's attempts to restrict birthright citizenship.
- The Court relied on the plain language of the 14th Amendment and historical common law precedent.
- Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence suggested Congress could potentially create exceptions through new legislation.
- Justice Thomas's dissent cited the Dred Scott case to argue the 14th Amendment's original intent applied only to formerly enslaved people. Justice Jackson's concurrence criticized the inconsistency of the Court's colorblind approach on other issues.
"The plain language of the 14th Amendment, supported by centuries of common law, makes clear that citizenship is the birthright of nearly all born on U.S. soil." — Majority opinion
Transgender Athlete Bans
- The Court ruled 6-3 that states may ban transgender girls and women from participating in sports at publicly funded schools and colleges.
- The majority held that under Title IX, "sex" refers to biological sex, consistent with the statute's original intent to address disparities in girls' and boys' sports.
- The ruling was considered expected given the Court's prior decisions on transgender rights.
Campaign Finance
- The Court struck down limits on how much political parties can raise and spend on candidates, invalidating restrictions on coordinated expenditures.
- Dissenting Justice Kagan warned the decision would enable donors to give up to half a million dollars to parties as a "checking account" for campaigns.
"This ruling allows wealthy donors to effectively open a half-million-dollar checking account for a political party to spend on a candidate." — Justice Kagan, dissenting
Analysis of Court's Relationship with Trump Agenda
- The birthright citizenship and tariff decisions (earlier term) went against the Trump administration, but other rulings broadly expanded presidential power (e.g., on firing agency officials).
- Law professor Kim Wehle noted that the campaign finance decision and other pro-presidential power rulings constitute significant victories for the administration.