Trump signed two new executive orders again restricting birthright citizenship after Supreme Court struck down his original order

On August 6, 2026, President Trump signed two executive orders in the Oval Office again seeking to restrict birthright citizenship, weeks after the Supreme Court ruled in Trump v. Barbara (June 30, 2026) that his original January 20, 2025 executive order -- which denied citizenship to children of parents unlawfully or temporarily present in the United States -- could not be reconciled with the 14th Amendment. Trump rejected the Court's reasoning, calling the ruling "very unfortunate" and saying "we're making adjustments because it's very unfair," and asserted, contrary to the Court's holding, that the Citizenship Clause was intended only for "the babies of slaves."

The first order non-exhaustively lists categories of U.S.-born children the administration deems ineligible for birthright citizenship notwithstanding Barbara, including children of "alien enemies," foreign government lobbyists, and members of terrorist organizations. The second order delegates the President's authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act to the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security, directing them to deny visas to, revoke travel authorization from, or remove foreign nationals found to have entered or attempted to enter the United States for "birth tourism" -- traveling on a nonimmigrant visa for the purpose of giving birth to a U.S. citizen child. White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller said the effort would target travelers who misrepresent their purpose of travel to consular officers, and White House staff secretary Will Scharf said the order would include a law-enforcement component.

The ACLU, which successfully challenged Trump's original 2025 order, condemned the new orders and said they would "meet the same fate as the last one," arguing the Supreme Court had already settled that birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the Constitution and cannot be narrowed by executive order. Asked whether the new orders would survive judicial review, Trump said "I think it will," but multiple outlets reported the orders are expected to face immediate legal challenges given the Court's recent, direct rejection of similar reasoning underlying the original order.

Updates

2026-08-11 — ACLU and six other legal groups asked federal court to block the new order [7, 8]

The national ACLU and six affiliated groups -- the same coalition that successfully challenged Trump's original 2025 order -- asked U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante in New Hampshire to either clarify that his existing injunction covers the new order or issue a new one blocking it, arguing it exceeds the narrow diplomat/enemy-occupation exceptions the Supreme Court reaffirmed in Trump v. Barbara. It was the first direct court challenge to the August 6 order.

2026-08-28 — Judge Boardman declined to block Aug. 6 order in separate Maryland case [10, 11]

In a separate challenge from the New Hampshire case above, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman in Greenbelt, Maryland declined to immediately grant a temporary restraining order against the August 6 order, calling it "unprecedented" while noting the plaintiffs' existing complaint -- from the 2025 case in which she had blocked Trump's original birthright-citizenship order -- did not yet address the new one. She set a briefing schedule for the plaintiffs to file a revised complaint directly challenging the August 6 order before she reconsiders the restraining-order request.

2026-09-01 — State Department drafted guidance requiring parents to prove their own citizenship for a child's passport [11]

Reuters reported it had reviewed draft State Department guidance implementing the August 6 "birth tourism" order, which would require parents applying for a passport for a U.S.-born child to submit proof of their own citizenship or immigration status -- such as a valid U.S. passport, birth certificate, or a green card or I-94 record -- a departure from current passport-application practice. State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott said the administration would ensure "our passport adjudication process fully reflects" its citizenship policy.

2026-09-02 — Judge Boardman granted a preliminary injunction against the Aug. 6 order [12]

In the same Maryland case referenced above, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman granted a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the August 6 order against the certified class of children who would have been denied citizenship under Trump's original 2025 order, finding the new policy likely unconstitutional under the Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. Barbara. The order allows agencies to continue drafting implementing guidance but bars its enforcement against the class. A second challenge remains pending in New Hampshire.