Do you want the good news or the bad news first? In the past week, the Supreme Court handed down a flurry of key rulings that dismayed or delighted Americans, depending on their viewpoint. Personally, of the three I was in prayer about, I was dismayed by two rulings and delighted by one.

Help support IFA monthly by becoming an MMP.

View Comments (17)

But… as a Christian, I must remember that with God, it is all good news. God is good ALL THE TIME… even when the Supreme Court hands down rulings I don’t agree with. After all, it is God who… does as He pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth. No one can hold back His hand or say to him: “What have You done? (Daniel 4:35 NIV)

For dominion belongs to the Lord and He rules over the nations. (Psalm 22:28 NIV)

So secure in the knowledge that our Triune God is Lord over all the earth, His Son sits at His right hand (1 Peter 3:22 NIV), and His Holy Spirit convicts the world about sin, righteousness, and judgment. (John 16:8 NIV), let’s discuss three of the Supreme Court’s most critical decisions affecting the United States.

1. Watson v RNC – Mail-in Ballots

With the midterms fast approaching, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled in a narrow 5-4 decision that mail-in ballots can be counted after Election Day if they are postmarked by Election Day.

The majority opinion written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett stated that “the election-day statutes require the electorate’s choice to be made on election day. That occurs so long as election day is the deadline for individuals to vote… But the election-day statutes do not set a deadline for ballot receipt, so they do not prevent Mississippi from counting ballots postmarked before election day yet received afterward.”

Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the dissenting opinion, argued that “from this Nation’s founding until the last few decades of the 20th century—a period that spans the enactment of all three election-day statutes—having an ‘election’ on a particular day meant completing ballot collection on that day.”

U.S. Solicitor General John Saur had argued that “On election day, the ballot box must close and every vote received.” Federal law declares the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November as Election Day. But 15 states and D.C. passed laws allowing ballots postmarked by election day but received five days after Election Day to be counted.

Chief Justice John Roberts joined Justice Barrett and the three liberal female justices. The majority decided that counting ballots after election day did not violate federal election statutes.

“The election-day statutes say nothing about ballot receipt, and we cannot add to the words Congress chose,” Justice Barrett wrote. We should not be held to 19^th century election-day laws or voting practices in light of modern-day elections she went on to write, “historical practice, detached from statutory text, is not controlling.” [Yet in the birthright citizenship case, she ruled just the opposite. More about that in a moment.]

To the majority of Justices, Election DAY does not really mean one single day. President Trump reacted on Truth Social…

“In light of the tremendous loss in the Supreme Court today concerning Voter’s Rights, and the fact that ‘peoples’ votes are allowed to be counted LONG AFTER an Election is over, it is more important than ever to pass THE SAVE AMERICA ACT, which is, 1. ALL VOTERS MUST SHOW PHOTO I.D. (IDENTIFICATION!); 2. ALL VOTERS MUST SHOW PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP; 3. NO MAIL-IN BALLOTS (EXCEPT FOR ILLNESS, DISABILITY, MILITARY DEPLOYMENT, OR TRAVEL!). There is no excuse for a politician, or otherwise, to be against the above three requirements. There is only one reason to oppose — CHEATING!”

• Let’s pray the ruling breaks the logjam in the Senate to pass the SAVE Act to preserve the public’s trust in election outcomes. Remember Spencer Pratt was ahead by 8 points on election night but lost to the third-place finisher when late-arriving ballots were counted days later.
• Let’s pray that individual states will change their own election laws to ensure that all ballots are received and counted by Election Day.
• Let’s pray that all voter fraud, schemes, and efforts to rig the mid-term elections will be exposed and thwarted.

2. Trump v. Barbara – Birthright Citizenship

The most significant (and perhaps divisive) decision of the Supreme Court’s 2025-2026 term was its 5-4 ruling on birthright citizenship. The Court ruled that if you are born in the United States, you are automatically a U.S. citizen even if your parents are here illegally or on a temporary tourist visa.

Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett once again joined the three liberal female justices in striking down President Trump’s Executive Order prohibiting babies born to illegals or birth tourism moms from becoming citizens.

Justice Roberts, who wrote the majority opinion, ruled that children born of parents unlawfully or temporarily present in the United States satisfy both elements of the Citizenship Clause of the 14^th Amendment. The two elements are 1) being born in the United States, and 2) being subject to the jurisdiction thereof. “Under the Constitution,” he concluded, “they are citizens at birth.”

The majority relied heavily on a 1898 U.S. Supreme Court case, U.S. v Wong Kim Ark. Wong was born in the United States to Chinese legal immigrants. At the time, the country had a law, known as the Chinese Exclusion Act, that said no Chinese immigrant could become a U.S. citizen. But since Wong was born in the U.S., he was ruled a citizen, not an immigrant.

Justice Roberts wrote, “In the 128 years since, we have repeatedly understood the rule” of that case “to guarantee citizenship to all children born in the United States and subject to its power.”

Unlike her opinion in Watson v. RNC, Justice Barrett appears to have no qualms in upholding this 19th-century decision without considering the massive modern-day influx of illegals or the abuse of birth tourism.

Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas were scathing in their dissent.

Justice Alito called the ruling “a serious mistake that will affect the country’s future.” This ruling, he wrote, is “not only contrary to the original meaning of the 14^th Amendment, it produces grotesque results… While foreigners who wish to immigrate lawfully must sometimes wait for many years, a child born here to a birth tourist is automatically a citizen.”

He chastised the majority, writing, “We should not adopt an erroneous interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment simply out of fear of the consequences of ‘rocking the boat’ or as a reaction to current immigration policy.”

Justice Thomas wrote that after the Civil War, “Blacks were entitled to citizenship because they were Americans. They had no other homeland, owed no allegiance to any foreign power, and were subject to no other authority. The Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed and understood to secure equal rights for the freed blacks but has instead been repurposed for political projects that the Reconstruction Congress did not support.”

Justice Thomas claimed the decision denigrates the concept of U.S. citizenship. “I am not sure that today’s opinion will stand the test of time,” he wrote. “The Citizenship Clause ‘added greatly to the dignity and glory of American citizenship.’ Today’s opinion devalues that citizenship.”

Both Justices expressed concerns that birth tourism may be a national security issue, allowing people of enemy nations to obtain citizenship. The Center for Immigration Studies estimates tens of thousands of babies are born in the U.S. or one of its territories each year and granted birthright citizenship. The two top countries taking advantage of this are China and Russia.

With their decision on Tuesday, the Supreme Court has basically invited any woman in the world to come to the U.S. for the specific purpose of having a baby so their child can claim all the rights and benefits of being a U.S. citizen, including voting rights, a free education, free health care, and generous welfare benefits.

In true Trumpian fashion, the president wrote on Truth Social Tuesday, “I would like to congratulate President Xi, and the Great Country of China, on their massive Birthright Citizenship WIN!”

Will Congress Act in light of this decision? Perhaps so.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a concurrent opinion that politicians could enact new legislation establishing exceptions to birthright citizenship for children born to foreign citizens unlawfully or temporarily in the country.” Section 5 of the 14^th Amendment states The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a press conference on Tuesday that birthright citizenship has been “abused. It’s one of those things that was intended to serve a noble, important purpose, and has been thwarted and overused and abused, and so I’m sure that we’ll continue to look at that… I will say I’m very disappointed in that outcome. I think it subjects the country to serious challenges going forward, and we’ll have to deal with it as a Congress.”

Senator Bernie Moreno (R-OH) plans to reintroduce Senator Harry Reid’s (D-NV) exact bill – the Immigration Stabilization Act of 1993 – eliminating birthright citizenship for illegal aliens. Sen. Moreno is calling his bill the Immigration Stabilization Act of 2026, and like Senator Reid’s original bill, would also cut legal immigration limits and annual refugee admissions.

“Before far-left radicals took over the Democrat Party, their leader Harry Reid introduced a great bill to end birthright citizenship, ensure no illegals could vote, and crack down on employers who abuse illegal labor,” Moreno said. “It was a great bill.”

Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas has already filed legislation, the Constitutional Citizenship Act, to ensure only children who are here lawfully are granted citizenship. Children of illegal immigrants, terrorists, and foreign spies would be ineligible.

Senator Rand Paul has filed a Joint Resolution to amend the U.S. Constitution to end automatic birthright citizenship. He wrote on X: “The Supreme Court’s decision on birthright citizenship is disappointing. That’s why I’ve already filed an amendment to end birthright citizenship for those here illegally. I’ll keep fighting to protect the integrity of American citizenship”

Passing a Constitutional Amendment is difficult and often takes years. It requires a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress and three-fourths of the states to ratify it. In the past 250 years, only 27 Amendments have been added to the Constitution. The first ten (The Bill of Rights) were passed all at once in 1791. The 27^th Amendment was passed 34 years ago.

President Trump is totally behind the effort to make changes through legislation, stating…

“The Supreme Court upheld Birthright Citizenship, which is too bad for our Country, but we can easily make it up in Congress through Legislation, with the support of the President, who has now been determined during this process,” Trump said. “No long and unwieldy Constitutional Amendment is necessary! Congress should start TODAY to work on ending expensive and unfair to our Country, Birthright Citizenship. They will have my Complete and Total Support!”

The Executive Branch Acts

In the wake of the Supreme Court decision, the Department of Justice is ordering its federal prosecutors to team up with Homeland Security to crack down on birth tourism visas, especially on the companies that help foreign pregnant women obtain fraudulent visas. The DOJ will pursue the women who participate and the companies that profit from them.

The State Department is actively reviewing the visas of foreigners who have overstayed their visas or for any breach in visa conditions.

Immediately after the Supreme Court ruling, Tom Homan promised to step up enforcement of immigration laws, deportations, and a crackdown on birth tourism. “Birthright citizenship has always been a driver for illegal immigration, he said, “but more importantly it is a national security issue.” He urges Congress to act.

Vice President Vance said with a 5-4 decision, birthright citizenship was “hanging by a thread.” He continued, “What I take from that is, yes, we’ve got to fix the immigration system even more, we have to be even more aware of who is coming into our country to make sure that they are not benefiting from this atrocious Supreme Court ruling. But it also means that we have to keep fighting, because we actually have an opportunity to reverse this decision just as we’ve reversed so many bad decisions throughout the generations.”

• Let’s pray the decision handed down by the Supreme Court will galvanize Congress to act to protect United States citizenship and fix our broken immigration system.
• Let’s pray the American people will rise up and demand Congress and their state legislators pass legislation or a Constitutional Amendment to end birthright citizenship.

3. Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J — Trans Bans in Sports

In a major win for commonsense and the culture, the Supreme Court in a 6-3 ruling upheld state bans on biological males playing on female sports teams. They ruled that state bans do not violate the Constitution or federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in education. Twenty-seven states have banned trans athletes from girls’ sports.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a Girl Dad with two daughters, and for many years has coached girls’ school basketball teams, wrote the court’s majority opinion.

“The Constitution and Title IX do not require an overhaul of women’s and girls’ sports throughout America,” he wrote. “Separate sports teams for biological males and biological females are reasonable. Given the inherent physical differences between the sexes, allowing only biological females to play on women’s and girls’ teams can reduce the risk of physical injury and ensure fair competition.

“The two States here – along with 25 other States, the IOC, the USOPC, and the NCAA – have concluded at this time that women and girls should be allowed to compete … on an equal playing field, without fear of physical injury from biological males or being forced to compete against biological males.

“Consistent with Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause, we hold that the States may maintain women’s and girls’ sports for biological females. They may determine eligibility for women’s and girls’ sports based on biological sex,” he wrote.

The opinion also stated that the term “sex” in Title IX “cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex… and not gender identity.

Justice Ketanji Brown-Jackson, who was unable to define what a woman is in her confirmation hearing, wrote in her dissent that the majority was ignoring the discrimination suffered by transgender athletes – discrimination that Title IX was supposed to protect.

“When B.P.J. is sorted onto a team by sex assigned at birth, she doubtless suffers discrimination on the basis of her sex assigned at birth,” she wrote.

It is ironic that the three liberal female justices voted NOT to protect real girls from harm or support them in their dreams for athletic achievements and scholarships.

This year’s ruling upholding state bans on trans athletes follows last year’s major decision upholding state bans on gender-rejection treatments on minors. The Supreme Court does not appear shy about ruling on the trans culture issues.

For the 2026-2027 term, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear another critical case, International Partners for Ethical Care v. Ferguson, regarding a parent’s right to challenge a Washington state law allowing runaway teens to receive mental health care and gender transitioning at licensed shelters without parental consent.

Sadly, the Supreme Court refused to take up Foote V. Ludlow, a Massachusetts case challenging a school district’s policy of secretly socially transitioning a student without their parents’ knowledge or consent. But the Court is considering more cases to hear regarding parental rights and their child’s gender transition.

• Let’s pray that Congress will act and pass a national ban on trans athletes playing on girls’ teams.
• Let’s pray that all states will pursue protecting women and girls from harm by enacting bans on trans athletes.
• Let’s pray that this ruling also spurs legislation to keep biological males out of all female safe spaces, such as bathrooms, locker rooms, sororities, women’s prisons, and all areas where women exclusively gather.
• Let’s pray, as always, that all children and adults suffering from gender dysphoria will be healed and come to a saving knowledge of Jesus, finding their true identity in Christ.
• Let’s pray for Godly wisdom and discernment for all Supreme Court Justices in deciding what cases they will hear and for them to decide in accordance with God’s righteousness.

The earth is the Lord’s and everything that fills it, the world and all who live in it… Lift up your heads, you gates. Lift yourselves up, you ancient doors, and the King of Glory will come in. Who is this King of Glory? The Lord is strong and mighty. (Psalm 24:1, 7-8)

What do you think of these Supreme Court rulings? Share your thoughts and prayers below.

Belinda Brewster analyzes cultural, political, and world events from a biblical worldview. Belinda’s passion is to equip, support, and encourage parents and grandparents who are courageously battling against the spiritual and cultural forces impacting children and grandchildren. Photo Credit: Alex Wong/Getty Images.