He still hasn't given up. In the wake of the 6-3 decision of the Supreme Court tossing out his Executive Order abolishing birthright citizenship, President Donald Trump was back at it, insisting that Congress should act. He cared enough about the case that he took the unprecedented step of attending the oral argument. But he brushed off the historic loss in the Court.

He posted on Truth Social: "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 ... 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!"

In fact, according to five of the six Justices in the majority, a long and unwieldy process would be required because Trump's Executive Order violated the Fourteenth Amendment. The Constitution specifically provides: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." All persons born in the United States are citizens. It couldn't be clearer, which hasn't stopped Trump from harping on it for the last decade.Two-thirds of both houses of Congress must pass a proposal to amend the Constitution, then ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states. It is a cumbersome process and rightly so, certainly in this case.

The argument — or maybe the polemic — against birthright citizenship focuses on what are called the "anchor babies" — the children of illegal immigrants who are born here and then used to secure legal residence for their families. It's mostly a myth: the anchor babies have to wait until they are 21 to sponsor their parents for green cards, which then becomes a nightmare because they have to return to their home country and wait years to complete the process — and the fear that, if they leave, they will not be permitted re-entry into the country.

There will be bills introduced in Congress, but they should go nowhere. The constitutional obstacle, which had been assumed, has now been established. It's one of Trump's two big losses — the other being tariffs — before a conservative Court that has mostly done his bidding.

The Supreme Court also ended its term, ending the careers of transgender girls in school sports across the country and allowing political parties to pour even more money directly into candidate campaigns, taking the swamp that is electoral politics and just expanding it.

The issue of transgender girls in sports may be ahead of its time, as the late Barney Frank suggested, but the individual stories of girls being forced to give up their passion to satisfy politicians are compelling.As for the freedom of the political parties to pour more money into the process, is that even possible? The answer to the question is yes, and the reflecting pool turned green because that is the color of money, and since the landmark Supreme Court decision in Citizens United, there is no stopping the corruption of the system.

The landmark 2010 decision struck down restrictions on independent political spending by corporations, labor unions, and other organizations, allowing them to spend unlimited amounts of money on elections. The Super PACs came next, and the expansion goes on. The Republicans went to the Court for this one because their party committees have more money set aside. This committee will spend hundreds of millions alone; no wonder so many people are voting to get the bums out, even the bums they agree with.

And no wonder constitutional law scholar and Congressional leader Jamie Raskin has his eye on restructuring the Supreme Court.

Susan Estrich is a celebrated feminist legal scholar, the first female president of the Harvard Law Review, and the first woman to run a U.S. presidential campaign. She has written eight books.