post-thumb

Trump signs executive orders targeting birthright citizenship

Trump Renews Birthright Citizenship Challenge With Narrower Executive Orders

U.S. President Donald Trump signed two executive orders Thursday seeking to restrict birthright citizenship in narrower circumstances, renewing a constitutional dispute after the Supreme Court rejected his earlier approach. The measures form part of the administration’s broader immigration enforcement agenda and focus partly on “birth tourism,” the practice of traveling to the United States primarily to give birth.

The administration says the new directives are designed to operate within the boundaries of the court’s ruling. They would classify groups as ineligible for automatic citizenship, including some children born to people who enter for birth tourism, foreign government employees, and individuals designated as alien enemies. The orders could also affect U.S. territories if Congress passes legislation ending automatic citizenship there.

White House aide Stephen Miller said the orders prohibit obtaining a visa for the purpose of birth tourism. A 2020 analysis by the Center for Immigration Studies estimated that 20,000 to 25,000 mothers traveled to the country for that purpose during a one-year period in 2016 and 2017. However, no official figures track the practice or its cost.

Trump’s previous order would have denied citizenship to U.S.-born children when neither parent was a citizen or permanent resident. The Supreme Court ruled that policy unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision, affirming the longstanding interpretation of the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. That clause grants citizenship to people born in the United States, with limited exceptions involving foreign diplomats and enemy occupying forces.

Trump criticized the ruling and urged Congress to act, but proceeded through executive action. Executive orders direct federal policy but do not override constitutional requirements or court judgments. The new measures are expected to face legal challenges over whether their narrower categories are consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision and the 14th Amendment.

Share: