Key keywords: Supreme Court, executive power reshaping, birthright citizenship, 14th Amendment, U.S. immigration policy, conservative judicial majority, presidential authority, legal precedent Recent rulings from the U.S. Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority have upended decades of legal precedent surrounding executive branch authority, with legal analysts warning the landmark shifts have cleared a path for potential challenges to birthright citizenship guaranteed under the 14th Amendment. In two major rulings issued in the 2023-2024 term, the court first rolled back the Chevron deference doctrine that had required courts to defer to federal agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous congressional laws, drastically curbing the power of the executive branch to implement policy without explicit legislative approval. A second ruling restricted the president’s authority to set national immigration enforcement priorities, granting individual states far more leeway to enact and enforce their own immigration rules, even when they conflict with federal policy. Legal scholars across the ideological spectrum have described these rulings as a historic restructuring of the separation of powers, with many noting that the conservative majority has repeatedly signaled willingness to revisit long-held constitutional interpretations that were previously considered settled. Among the most high-profile targets for conservative legal advocates is birthright citizenship, the principle enshrined in the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause that grants automatic citizenship to all people born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. Former President Donald Trump repeatedly floated executive orders to restrict birthright citizenship to children born to U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents during his time in office, but legal advisors at the time warned such an order would be immediately struck down in court, given decades of Supreme Court precedent upholding the 14th Amendment’s application to children of undocumented immigrants. But following the court’s recent moves to limit executive power and prioritize state authority over immigration policy, conservative legal groups have confirmed they are preparing test cases to bring before the Supreme Court that seek to narrow the scope of the 14th Amendment’s citizenship guarantee. Proponents of the restrictions argue the clause was never intended to apply to children of parents who are in the country illegally, while opponents warn such a ruling would create a permanent underclass of stateless people born in the U.S. who have no access to citizenship, social services, or legal protections. Polling shows the issue remains deeply divisive, with roughly 48% of U.S. voters supporting restrictions to birthright citizenship and 45% opposing them, according to a 2024 Pew Research Center survey. If the court agrees to hear a birthright citizenship case in its upcoming term, the ruling could represent the most significant change to U.S. citizenship rules in more than 150 years.