Justice Clarence Thomas expressed strong disagreement with the Supreme Court's ruling that birthright citizenship applies to the children of illegal immigrants and temporary residents in the United States. He stated that he does not believe the decision will endure over time and argued that it diminishes the value of American citizenship. The case was influenced by an executive order from former President Donald Trump, which contended that the 14th Amendment does not grant citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants or temporary residents.
In his dissent, Thomas stated, "The court today takes the extraordinary step of holding facially unconstitutional the President’s Order excluding from citizenship the children of foreign temporary visitors and illegal aliens." He emphasized that the 14th Amendment was originally intended to apply to freed slaves and their descendants, who had no allegiance to foreign nations.
Thomas further remarked, "I am not sure that today’s opinion will stand the test of time. The Citizenship Clause ‘added greatly to the dignity and glory of American citizenship.’ Today’s opinion devalues that citizenship."
Justice Samuel Alito, in a separate dissent, characterized the court's decision as a “serious mistake,” arguing that it grants citizenship to nearly anyone born in the U.S., including children of individuals who come solely to give birth. Alito noted that this interpretation could incentivize illegal immigration, stating, "The court’s interpretation preserves a powerful incentive to enter or remain in this country illegally."
Justice Neil Gorsuch also concurred with Thomas and provided his own dissenting opinion.