Credit to Gustavo Arellano of the LAtimes for pointing this out, here: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-07-01/justice-samuel-alito-birthright-citizenship-dissent
I have included larger excerpts from Alito’s dissent in the Birthright Citizenship case that show Alito’s contempt for immigrants, both legal and illegal.
“When illegal entrants overran Texas border towns, the State erected barbed wire fencing, but Border Patrol officers cut or displaced the fencing.”
This is one of the most important decisions in the history of the Court, and in my judgment, the Court has made a serious mistake. As interpreted by the Court today, the Fourteenth Amendment confers citizenship on virtually everyone who happens to be born in this country, including the children of “birth tourists,” women who come here solely for the purpose of giving birth to a child and then promptly return home. Careful analysis of the text of the Fourteenth Amendment and the process that led to its adoption shows that it does not degrade the concept of United States citizenship in this way.
Finally, as a result of these developments, the number of illegal immigrants in this country exploded.
As a result of the events of the past 50 years, the United States now has a huge contingent of people who entered or remained in this country illegally, as well as a large group of people who were born here to such parents. The Court’s interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment makes all the members of this latter group citizens. Many of those who have grown up here now have a strong moral claim to be allowed to remain, but that is a matter that the Fourteenth Amendment, when properly interpreted, leaves to Congress.
The number of applications under the agricultural pathway “far exceeded estimates,” at least in part because of fraud. Martin 225–226. *
The Court’s interpretation is not only contrary to the original meaning of the Fourteenth 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.
As the lower courts found and a video confirms, the federal officers installed a climbing rope on the Texas side of the river and made no effort to turn back a stream of migrants who were wading across the Rio Grande. Instead of processing the entrants, border officers simply told them to walk a mile or more without supervision to the nearest immigration processing center.11 Then, from the comfort of chambers more than 1,000 miles from the southern border, this Court sided with the Federal Government, allowing immigrants to pour into the State.
*Alito cites to Susan Martin’s book, “A Nation of Immigrants.” Martin does not cite to any evidence to support her claims about fraud, as the relevant excerpt shows:
Several explanations have been offered for the wide discrepancy. SAW applications could be made from outside the country, meaning that people who had worked previously in agriculture (perhaps not during the period included in the law) could apply even if they had left the country. More seriously, there appeared to be many fraudulent applications by people who had never worked in agriculture but found someone to provide an affidavit or counterfeit documents showing that they had put in ninety days in the fields.
Further, one can see that Martin did not even make a conclusion, she merely stated “there appeared” to be many fraudulent applications. Alito re-packaged Martin’s claim and omitted that she was merely guessing that there “appeared” to be fraud.
Alito should be ashamed that he has allowed his political anti-immigrant ideology to usurp his integrity as a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.
LAW OFFICE OF BRYAN S. JOHNSON, P.C. 