Donald Trump is doing what Donald Trump does best: losing in court, then asking for a do-over. This time, the former president is petitioning the Supreme Court to rehear a case on birthright citizenship—a legal long shot that has constitutional scholars scratching their heads.
The move comes just days after the Court refused to hear his appeal in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case, where a jury found him liable for sexual abuse. That loss stung. This new petition feels like a tantrum dressed in legal briefs.
What’s the Birthright Citizenship Play?
Trump’s legal team filed a petition for rehearing in a case challenging the 14th Amendment’s guarantee that anyone born on U.S. soil is a citizen. During his presidency, Trump tried to end birthright citizenship via executive order—a move courts blocked as unconstitutional. Now he’s hoping the Supreme Court will revisit the issue from scratch.
Here’s the problem: The Court already declined to take up the case in 2024. Rehearing petitions are rarely granted—less than 1% succeed. They’re typically reserved for cases where the Court overlooked a critical fact or when there’s an intervening change in law. Neither applies here.
“This is a Hail Mary pass from an end zone that doesn’t exist,” says Sarah Turley, a constitutional law professor at Georgetown. “The Court doesn’t rehear cases just because the losing side doesn’t like the result.”
The E. Jean Carroll Hangover
This isn’t Trump’s first rehearing request this month. He’s also asked the Court to reconsider its denial of his appeal in the Carroll case—a defamation suit stemming from a jury finding that he sexually abused the writer in the 1990s. That petition is equally doomed. The Court typically doesn’t reverse its own denial of certiorari unless something dramatic shifts.
What’s driving these desperate filings? Ego, mostly. Trump has spent decades refusing to accept legal defeats—suing everyone from banks to beauty pageant winners. But the Supreme Court isn’t a reality show. There’s no second chance after the credits roll.
Legal Experts Predict a Quick Rejection
The birthright citizenship petition faces an uphill battle. The 14th Amendment’s language is clear: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” Courts have upheld this for over a century. Even conservative judges have rejected Trump’s interpretation.
“The legal arguments against birthright citizenship are weak to the point of frivolous,” says Jonathan Adler, a law professor at Case Western Reserve. “This petition is more about political theater than legal strategy.”
If the Court rejects the rehearing—as it almost certainly will—Trump may take the issue to the campaign trail. He’s already used immigration as a rallying cry in 2026 midterms. But the courts aren’t campaign stops. They don’t give stump speeches.
What’s Next?
The Supreme Court will likely deny both rehearing petitions within weeks. That will leave Trump with no further appeals in the Carroll case—meaning he’ll have to pay the $5 million judgment. In the birthright citizenship fight, he’ll have to wait for a new case to percolate through lower courts.
But don’t expect Trump to go quietly. He’ll call the judges “biased,” the system “rigged,” and his supporters “warriors.” It’s the same script he’s used for years. The only difference now is that the Supreme Court has stopped listening.
This isn’t a legal strategy. It’s a fundraising pitch. And it’s running out of steam.
