President Donald Trump of the United States has experienced a blend of outcomes from the Supreme Court, which has both endorsed and struck down various cornerstone policies of his administration.
Within the chambers of the Supreme Court, many of Trump’s executive actions, including the sweeping and ambitious policy moves implemented during his initial months in office, come under rigorous review by state-appointed judges.
This past Tuesday marked the conclusion of the court’s term, with its nine state-appointed justices delivering pivotal verdicts on some of Trump’s most contentious executive orders and legislations.
The rulings addressed a spectrum of issues from immigration policies and transgender athletes’ rights in sports to the repercussions of one of Trump’s high-profile dismissals.
Read more below to uncover details about Trump’s pivotal Tuesday.
Defeat: Birthright citizenship
Trump suffered a massive blow to the anti-immigration initiatives at the heart of his second presidency after the Supreme Court rejected a bid to restrict birthright citizenship.
The move was part of a raft of executive orders signed on the first day of his second stint at the White House, announcing that children born to parents in the United States who were there illegally or on temporary visas would not automatically become US citizens.
On Tuesday, the court ruled 6-3 to maintain the right to American citizenship for nearly everyone born on US soil — even when their parents are not US citizens.
“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,” chief justice John Roberts wrote in the court’s opinion.
SBS News previously reported that Trump’s move drew parallels with reforms introduced in 1986 under the Hawke government. In Australia, children of temporary residents qualify for citizenship after living in the country for the first 10 years of their lives.
Following the ruling, the US Justice Department released a memo directing prosecutors to investigate “birth tourism” and promising to “zealously protect the sanctity of United States citizenship”.
The executive order was part of a broader campaign to limit immigration, with widespread detention and deportations sparking protest and unrest across the country.
Defeat: You’re (not) fired!
The Supreme Court thwarted Trump’s bid to fire one of the governors of the Federal Reserve — the US central bank.
Lisa Cook was the first black woman to sit on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. The former economics professor was appointed to the board by the Biden administration in 2022.
In late 2025, Trump announced he had sufficient grounds to believe Cook had made false statements in one or more mortgage agreements. He ordered her removed from the board with immediate effect.
Cook denied the allegations, and took legal action on the grounds Trump had no authority to remove her.
The decision means Cook can remain in her post while legal proceedings over her position continue in a lower court.
Trump has taken drastic steps against the US central bank, including a public campaign against former Fed chairman Jerome Powell. He has demanded that monetary policymakers lower interest rates to stimulate the economy, in moves that have raised questions about the central bank’s independence.
Victory: Transgender sports bans
In a major victory for one of the Trump Presidency’s fiercest culture-war battles, the Supreme Court upheld state laws barring transgender athletes from competing in girls’ and women’s school sports.
Public schools and college sports teams across more than two dozen Republican-led states will continue to enforce rules requiring athletes to compete according to their sex assigned at birth, rather than their gender identity.
Trump issued an executive order last year allowing federal agencies to deny funding to schools that permit transgender athletes to compete on girls’ or women’s teams.
Challenges were brought by transgender students who argued that the bans violated the federal civil rights law barring sex discrimination in education — known as Title IX.
The argument was rejected by conservative justice Brett Kavanaugh, a longtime coach of youth women’s basketball, who delivered the Supreme Court’s opinion on the ruling.
“May schools determine eligibility for women’s and girls’ sports based on biological sex? The answer is yes,” Kavanaugh wrote.
The ruling lands amid an escalating national push by conservatives to regulate transgender participation in public life, with a purge of trans and gender diverse officers serving in the US military; and 27 states enforcing gender-affirming health care restrictions.
Trump responded to some of the rulings on his Truth Social social media platform.
On the birthright citizenship ruling, he wrote in part: “The Supreme Court upheld Birthright Citizenship, which is too bad for our Country, but we can easily make it up in Congress through Legislation …”
On transgender sports bans, he wrote: “BIG WIN: The United States Supreme Court just RULED AGAINST MEN PLAYING IN WOMEN’S SPORTS. Wow! That takes that ridiculous situation off the table!!!”
Victory: Campaign spending
In a win that could prove seismic for the upcoming midterm elections, the Supreme Court on Tuesday lifted restrictions on the amount of money a political party can spend on an individual candidate.
The Republican Party brought the case to the Supreme Court before the 2024 election, with now vice president JD Vance leading the push, arguing that spending restrictions were against the US First Amendment.
Since 2010, spending restrictions have been eased for corporations, unions and other outside groups. Political parties, however, were limited in how much they could spend on things like advertising.
Supporters of the restrictions argued the rules prevented wealthy donors from funnelling money to their chosen candidate, and would curb corruption.
The court’s ruling was condemned by Senate Democratic minority leader Chuck Schumer, who in a statement accused the Supreme Court of giving “the very wealthy and big money special interest groups the green light to buy elections”.
US-based non-profit Open Secrets estimated the 2024 presidential election cost a total of US$15.9 billion ($24 billion) across both parties, including congressional campaigns — making it the most expensive election since Republican George W Bush won in 1998.
— With additional reporting by the Australian Associated Press and Agence France-Presse.