It was a busy Tuesday at the court as the justices released the final opinions in argued cases for the 2025-26 term and then orders from their Monday conference. Let’s get to it.
But first, do you know an exceptional lawyer looking for something different? We're hiring to help build a new editorial product serving appellate lawyers, corporate counsel, and commercial litigators. If you have a federal clerkship and significant appellate or commercial litigation experience, send a brief note explaining why you're interested, along with your resume, to scotusblog@thedispatch.com.
At the Court
On Tuesday, the court released three opinions addressing its four remaining cases: Trump v. Barbara, West Virginia v. B.P.J., Little v. Hecox, and National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission.
- In Barbara, the court struck down President Donald Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship. It held that children who are born in the United States to parents who are in this country either illegally or temporarily satisfy both elements of the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause, because they are “born ... in the United States” and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, which was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote an opinion concurring in the judgment and dissenting in part. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch. Gorsuch and Justice Samuel Alito also wrote dissenting opinions.
- In B.P.J. and Hecox, which were argued separately but addressed in a single opinion, the court held that Title IX allows schools to provide separate women’s and men’s sports teams defined by biological sex, as well as that West Virginia and Idaho did not violate the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause by requiring that only biological females can be on female sports teams. Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion, which was joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Barrett. Sotomayor wrote an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part, which was joined by Kagan and Jackson. Jackson also wrote an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part.
- In NRSC v. FEC, the court held, by a vote of 6-3, that the Federal Election Campaign Act’s restrictions on political party spending on campaign activities in coordination with candidates violate the First Amendment. Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion, and Kagan wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Sotomayor and Jackson.
On Monday, the justices held their “clean-up” conference, where they addressed petitions for review that may have been on hold as the court issued its final opinions in argued cases. On Tuesday, the court announced that it had taken up four cases (two of which are consolidated) during that conference and also turned down the Trump administration’s request to be allowed to fire the top U.S. copyright official, Shira Perlmutter. For more on Tuesday’s order list, see the On Site section below.
Morning Reads
NPR retracts story about Alito retirement
Kelly McBride, NPR
On Tuesday, just after the Supreme Court finished announcing opinions, NPR published and then retracted an article that said Justice Samuel Alito had retired. Tuesday afternoon, NPR Public Editor Kelly McBride wrote about how it happened, explaining that “NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg misheard an announcement about retirements as she was leaving” the court. “I was looking to see who else was reporting it, and nobody was reporting it, and then, basically, we realized that it was not true,” said NPR Executive Editor Krishnadev Calamur to McBride. “[Totenberg] called and said, ‘I made a mistake,’ and we rushed to make a retraction.”
Trump urges Congress to legislate restrictions on birthright citizenship
Bart Jansen, USA Today
In a social media post about Tuesday’s birthright citizenship ruling, President Donald Trump described the decision as “too bad for our Country” and called on Congress to pass legislation addressing the issue. “No long and unwieldy Constitutional Amendment is necessary! Congress should start TODAY to work on ending expensive and unfair to our Country, Birthright Citizenship. They will have my Complete and Total Support!,” the president wrote.
Trump says he will 'continue the fight' after Supreme Court declines to review Carroll abuse verdict
Louis Casiano, Fox News
On Monday, the Supreme Court denied review of President Donald Trump’s “appeal of a $5 million verdict that found he sexually abused writer E. Jean Carroll and later defamed her.” In a social media post about the court’s move, the president wrote that he will “continue the fight against” the case with all his “power and strength.” “Surprisingly, the Supreme Court declined to ‘review’ a Fake Case brought against me by a woman I never met (Decades old celebrity photo line, standing with her husband, does not count!),” Trump wrote. “This Case is really against the United States of America, and all it stands for, and should never be allowed to happen to another President, or Candidate to be!”
On Site
Opinion Analysis
Supreme Court strikes down Trump’s order ending birthright citizenship
The Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship – the guarantee of citizenship to virtually everyone born in the United States. A majority of the justices agreed with the challengers, as well as all of the lower courts that have considered the issue, that Trump’s order cannot be reconciled with the 14th Amendment.
Opinion Analysis
Court rules that states can exclude transgender athletes from girls’ and women’s sports teams
The court on Tuesday held that states can exclude transgender athletes from women’s and girls’ sports teams. The justices ruled unanimously that the laws enacted by Idaho and West Virginia do not violate federal civil rights laws, but they divided over whether the West Virginia law violates the Constitution, at least with regard to the athlete in the case before the court.
Opinion Analysis
Justices strike down campaign finance law
On Tuesday, the court issued a major ruling on money in elections, striking down, by a vote of 6-3, a federal law that limited the amount of money that political parties can spend in coordination with a candidate. The decision overruled the court’s 2001 decision in Federal Election Commission v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee.
Court News
Court grants several new cases, including on whether the Second Amendment protects possession of semiautomatic rifles
Less than a week after the court struck down a Hawaii law that barred gun owners with concealed-carry licenses from bringing guns onto private property unless they had explicit permission, the justices announced that they will weigh in on the constitutionality of bans on AR-15s and other semiautomatic rifles. The court also took up cases on religious discrimination and a contempt order targeting Apple.
View from the Court
Birthright citizenship: “We break no new ground today”
In his View from the Court column, Mark Walsh described what it was like in the courtroom as the justices (though Justice Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch were absent on Tuesday) handed down the final three opinions of the 2025-26 term.
Contributor Corner
Breaking down the birthright-citizenship decision
In his Empirical SCOTUS column, Adam Feldman analyzed the vote breakdown and opinions in Trump v. Barbara, the birthright citizenship case. The case, according to Feldman, “was emblematic of how the court can be predictable in closely followed cases while still leaving room for surprises.”
Podcasts
Advisory Opinions
Supreme Court Weighs In on Unitary Executive Theory
Sarah Isgur and David French break down Monday’s rulings on the unitary executive theory, mail-in voting, and the Fourth Amendment.
Advisory Opinions
It’s the End of the Term
SCOTUS struck down Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship, reshaped campaign finance law, and ruled that states can exclude transgender athletes from girls’ and women’s sports teams. Sarah Isgur and David French discuss in a marathon end-of-term episode.
Divided Argument
Always Already
Will Baude and Dan Epps talk about two related cases from the penultimate opinion drop day: Trump v. Slaughter, which overrules Humphrey's Executor and clears away for-cause protection for the independent agencies, alongside its interim-docket companion Trump v. Cook, where the very same logic somehow spares the Federal Reserve.
A Closer Look
Coverage of the Birthright Citizenship Ruling
As noted above, the Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down President Donald Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship in Trump v. Barbara. Through the order, which he signed the day he began his second term, Trump aimed to end the grant of automatic citizenship to babies born in the U.S. to parents who were in the country either illegally or temporarily. Here’s a sampling of headlines used to describe the court’s decision:
Associated Press: Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship, rejecting Trump’s proposed limits
USA Today: Supreme Court rejects Trump’s birthright citizenship order in major blow
Reuters: Supreme Court rejects Trump bid to restrict birthright citizenship
The Washington Post: Supreme Court upholds principle that almost all born on U.S. soil are American
The New York Times: Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship, Blocking a Key Trump Policy
The Wall Street Journal: Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Bid to Curtail Birthright Citizenship
Fox News: Trump suffers major Supreme Court defeat as justices uphold birthright citizenship
Vox: The Supreme Court just came one vote away from a constitutional catastrophe
Slate: The Supreme Court Narrowly Rules That America Can Stay America
SCOTUS Quotes
“Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights—to freely participate in our political community. The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land.’ We keep that promise today.”
— Chief Justice John Roberts in Trump v. Barbara (2026)
“This is one of the most important decisions in the history of the Court, and in my judgment, the Court has made a serious mistake.”
— Justice Samuel Alito, dissenting in Barbara
