The dispute centered on whether a president can reinterpret the Constitution’s guarantee of birthright citizenship.

Some Republican lawmakers are reigniting a push to amend the Constitution to end birthright citizenship after the Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to limit the right under the 14th Amendment.

The Supreme Court upheld the right of children born on U.S. soil to automatic American citizenship. In so doing, the court rejected President Trump's most aggressive attempt to limit immigration.

The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 against Trump's EO, affirming birthright citizenship for children born in the US to undocumented or temporarily present parents, citing historical legal precedents.

Justice Samuel Alito expressed discontent with the Supreme Court’s Tuesday decision to strike down the Trump administration’s restrictions on birthright citizenship, calling the ruling both “one of the most important decisions” in the court’s history and “a serious mistake” in a dissenting opinion.

Can any serious legal scholar argue with a straight face that the authors of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution intended for almost anyone born on U.S. soil to automatically gain U.S. citizenship?

In his dissent, Thomas argued that the 14th Amendment was a narrow correction for formerly enslaved Black Americans — not anyone born on U.S. soil.

Several prominent elected Republicans with law backgrounds on Tuesday broke with President Trump on the Supreme Court’s ruling over birthright citizenship, arguing that a constitutional amendment would have to be passed to change this method of obtaining citizenship.