By Harold Pease, Ph. D.
Within two weeks the “settled” birth citizenship issue sprang back to life. At least two billboards within five miles of our southern border announced in Spanish an “anchor baby hospital”—essentially advertising birthright citizenship for sale. Mission Regional Medical Center confirmed to Fox News that it was responsible for the advertising campaign, which promoted deliveries starting at $3,950 for a natural birth and $5,525 for a C-section, and directed viewers to a website, havemybabyinTEXAS.com, which since this news broke has been taken offline (“Abbott orders probe after Texas hospital advertises 'birth packages' in Mexico: 'Citizenship is not for sale’ Gov Greg Abbott directed Texas HHSC to probe the hospital for potential violations, warning citizenship 'is not for sale,’” By Brooke Taylor, Fox News, July 7, 2026). Moreover, birth tourism is an illegal practice now incentivized by the Supreme Court ruling. Consequently, Trump requests the Supreme Court for a rehearing “IMMEDIATELY. This miscarriage of justice will destroy America if they don't change [this] absolutely insane decision,” he insisted.
In the majority opinion announced June 30, 2026, the Supreme Court in Trump v. Barbara, Chief Justice John Roberts held that “children born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily present are ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ of the United States and are citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause” (“Supreme Court strikes down Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order in landmark decision,” by Scott Bomboy, National Constitution Center, June 30, 2026). Six of the nine justices consurred.
Three of the six members of the majority Justices: Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Keegan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, virtually never support the Constitution as written, and the whole argument against unlimited birthright citizenship is based on what was written and meant when written. Roberts has betrayed that base many times, for example his support of Obamacare and in this case. Some feel he is compromised. This gave the other side four justices initially--one short of a majority.
Kavanaugh’s basing his decision on federal law as interpreted the last half century that has distorted original intent, rather than the Constitution itself, was shameful. The Supreme Court’s entire function is to keep federal law in harmony with the Constitution not the distortions of it over time which is what he essentially acknowledged doing—not changing the Constitution by collective distortion. One distortion begets another and overtime becomes “a different constitution,” at justice and liberty’s expense. In this case, he was missing in action (MIA). These gave the left their victory. The Supreme Court’s entire function is to keep federal law in harmony with the Constitution not the distortions of it over time. Chief Justice Roberts, All visitors are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the country they came from—NOT America.
Justices: Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch dissented, arguing that the 14th Amendment citizenship clause was intended to secure rights for free slaves and does not apply to children of foreign temporary visitors and illegal aliens. These three were the only Justices of the nine that correctly used the Constitution as written in making their judgment.
A rehearing request is possible through Rule 44, but is all uphill. The last time the justices opted to rehear a case previously decided was in 1965, and that was to address a technical issue, not to issue a full reversal (X22 Report, hereafter not cited, Ep. 3945b, July 9, 2026, 57:36). The Supreme Court has only reversed a merits ruling once, in 1956’s Reid v. Covert (Trump demands Supreme Court re-examine birthright citizenship case: ‘Miscarriage of justice,’ by Ryan King, July 9, 2026). The request must be made by the president within 25 days of the ruling and a majority of the justices is still required but one of the members of the previous majority must support the rehearing.
The rehearing justice will not be one of the three women justices who never rule by original intent, as already mentioned, nor will it be Chief Justice John Roberts who can’t be trusted and wrote the opinion of the majority. That leaves only two majority justices, Amie Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh, the two court surprises, who normally follow original intent (as written) as do Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch.
Look for Kavanaugh, once reminded of his proper function as a a justice, and possibly Barrett as well, to be the member of the previous majority to support the rehearing required by implementing Rule 44. And with the new data, ANCHOR BABY HOSPITAL in Texas, coming to the fore, a new majority of 5—4 against is possible but it would require both Kavanaugh and Barrett—a miracle. But this president has received other miracles. Let the Constitution, as written, prevail. Justice Thomas wrote a 91 page dissent, it would be well if Barrett and Kavanaugh reviewed his dissenting comments (Ep. 3945b, July 9, 2026, 57:36).
Should Amendment 14 not prevail as written in the rehearing. "Trump's efforts to reverse birthright citizenship, may still succeed with or without SCOTUS: (Just the news.com/government/whitehouse. Truth (Ep. 3938b, June 30, 2026, 40:42). Trump, "The Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship, which is too bad for our country, but we can easily make it up in Congress through legislation, with the support of the president, that has now been determined during this process. No long and unwielding 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!” (Ep. 3938b, June 30, 2026,40:55). Let’s begin by defining the jurisdiction thereof to make it clear that citizenship is tied to the parents—not the soil. Also, we need to deny any state or federal funds that provide status to anyone "not subject to the jurisdiction thereof” of this country (Ep. 3938b, June 30, 2026, 41:35). These would disincentivize birth citizenship.
Dr. Harold Pease is a syndicated columnist and an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He taught history and political science from this perspective for over 30 years at Taft College. Newspapers have permission to publish this column. Read his weekly columns @ www.LibertyUnderFire.org Column #881.
Help preserve our Republic while we still can by sharing this column.