Court Watch
The decisions shaping citizenship law — each with the legal question, the holding, and, where available, a plain-English timeline. Filter by topic or search the set.
Last updated: July 2026
On sourcing: NCI distinguishes primary sources, court opinions, statutes, and commentary — and labels what the sources establish separately from what we conclude.
- DecidedU.S. Supreme Court · 2026
Trump v. Barbara
Slip op. (June 30, 2026)
Question
Are children born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily present citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment?
Holding & significance
Yes. Writing for five justices, Chief Justice Roberts reaffirmed Wong Kim Ark and struck down the 2025 executive order. Justice Kavanaugh concurred in the judgment on statutory grounds (8 U.S.C. § 1401), expressly noting that Congress 'could amend' the statute; three justices dissented. The central citizenship decision of the modern era — and the starting point for NCI's legislative and amendment strategy.
BirthrightJurisdiction - DecidedU.S. Supreme Court · 2025
Trump v. CASA, Inc.
606 U.S. ___ (2025)
Question
May a single federal district court block a federal policy nationwide through a 'universal' injunction?
Holding & significance
Held that universal injunctions generally exceed the equitable authority of federal courts. Decided in the birthright-citizenship litigation, it reshaped how challenges to the 2025 executive order proceeded — through class actions and party-specific relief — on the way to the 2026 merits ruling.
ProcedureBirthright - DecidedU.S. Court of Appeals (10th Cir.) · 2020
Fish v. Schwab
957 F.3d 1105 (10th Cir. 2020)
Question
Did Kansas's documentary-proof-of-citizenship requirement for voter registration violate the NVRA and the Constitution?
Holding & significance
Yes. The Tenth Circuit affirmed the invalidation of Kansas's proof-of-citizenship law, crediting evidence that it had blocked tens of thousands of apparently eligible registrants against scant evidence of noncitizen registration. The cautionary case NCI's franchise paper takes seriously: proof requirements must be designed so no eligible citizen is turned away.
ElectionsEqual Protection - DecidedU.S. Supreme Court · 2017
Sessions v. Morales-Santana
582 U.S. 47 (2017)
Question
Does a gender-based difference in the physical-presence rules for transmitting citizenship violate equal protection?
Holding & significance
Held the gender-based distinction unconstitutional, though the remedy leveled the requirement upward — an important equal-protection ruling on derivative citizenship.
Derivative CitizenshipEqual Protection - DecidedU.S. Supreme Court · 2017
Maslenjak v. United States
582 U.S. 335 (2017)
Question
Can the government revoke naturalized citizenship for any false statement, however immaterial?
Holding & significance
No. To strip citizenship through a criminal denaturalization conviction, the government must show the false statement was material to the decision to grant citizenship — a meaningful limit on denaturalization.
Denaturalization - DecidedU.S. Supreme Court · 2013
Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona
570 U.S. 1 (2013)
Question
May a state require documentary proof of citizenship from applicants who register with the federal voter-registration form?
Holding & significance
No — the NVRA's command that states 'accept and use' the federal form preempts a state-added proof requirement for that form. The Court identified the lawful path: ask the federal Election Assistance Commission to add the requirement to the form's state-specific instructions, with judicial review if it refuses. The anchor case for NCI's position that a durable proof-of-citizenship rule runs through Congress.
ElectionsPreemption - DecidedU.S. Supreme Court · 2012
Arizona v. United States
567 U.S. 387 (2012)
Question
How far may a state go in enforcing immigration law alongside the federal government?
Holding & significance
Struck down most of the challenged provisions of Arizona's SB 1070 as preempted by federal law (upholding the status-check provision at that stage), clarifying the boundary between state action and federal authority over immigration and nationality.
PreemptionEnforcement - DecidedU.S. Supreme Court · 2001
Nguyen v. INS
533 U.S. 53 (2001)
Question
May Congress impose different requirements on citizen fathers and citizen mothers for transmitting citizenship to a child born abroad?
Holding & significance
Upheld gender-differentiated rules for transmitting citizenship to children born abroad out of wedlock — a decision later revisited in Morales-Santana.
Derivative CitizenshipEqual Protection - DecidedU.S. Supreme Court · 1982
Plyler v. Doe
457 U.S. 202 (1982)
Question
May a state deny free public education to children based on immigration status?
Holding & significance
No. The Equal Protection Clause bars states from denying public education to children regardless of status — a key marker of the reach of Fourteenth Amendment protections.
Equal ProtectionChildren - DecidedU.S. Supreme Court · 1980
Vance v. Terrazas
444 U.S. 252 (1980)
Question
What must the government prove to establish that a citizen relinquished citizenship?
Holding & significance
Expatriation requires proof of a specific intent to relinquish citizenship — not merely a potentially expatriating act — refining Afroyim.
Expatriation - DecidedU.S. Supreme Court · 1967
Afroyim v. Rusk
387 U.S. 253 (1967)
Question
Can the government revoke citizenship without the citizen's consent — here, for voting in a foreign election?
Holding & significance
No. Citizenship cannot be taken away without the individual's voluntary relinquishment — a cornerstone of modern citizenship security.
Expatriation - DecidedU.S. Supreme Court · 1958
Trop v. Dulles
356 U.S. 86 (1958)
Question
May the government strip citizenship as punishment for wartime desertion?
Holding & significance
No. Denationalization as punishment is unconstitutional; Chief Justice Warren's plurality opinion articulated the 'evolving standards of decency' framework that would shape later doctrine.
Expatriation - DecidedU.S. Supreme Court · 1898
United States v. Wong Kim Ark
169 U.S. 649 (1898)
Question
Is a child born in the United States to noncitizen parents a U.S. citizen at birth?
Holding & significance
The foundational birthright-citizenship decision: yes. The Citizenship Clause extends to nearly all children born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents' citizenship.
Birthright - DecidedU.S. Supreme Court · 1884
Elk v. Wilkins
112 U.S. 94 (1884)
Question
Is a Native American, born a member of a tribe, automatically a citizen under the Fourteenth Amendment?
Holding & significance
Held that being 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States required more than birth on U.S. soil for tribal members, who owed allegiance to their own quasi-sovereign nations — a question Congress later addressed in the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.
BirthrightJurisdiction
A curated set of landmark decisions with settled citations. Real-time docket tracking of pending citizenship cases (filings, argument dates, decisions) connects to the courts in a later phase.