The Importance of Birthright Citizenship in the U.S. During the First Two Years of the Republican Presidential Reionization

During his first presidential run in 2015, Trump also promised to end birthright citizenship and in 2018, he said he would issue an executive order. That order did not come to fruition.

Birth right citizenship is an automatic U.S. citizen if the person is born in the U.S. or the United States territories. The clause said that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States and of the State.”

Trump wants to reinterpret the phrasing “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” to mean that the federal government would not recognize automatic birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to parents without legal status, incoming White House officials told reporters on a call on Monday, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss upcoming actions.

There are details about who might be impacted and how he plans to move forward. He is scheduled to sign executive orders Monday afternoon.

The number of children born to parents without legal status in the United States has fallen over the last several decades. The latest data available shows that 1.3 million US born adults are children of unauthorized immigrants.

Eliminating birthright citizenship would have a negative effect on communities, economies and families’ wellbeing because of the potential consequences of not being able to authorize future children, according to immigrant rights groups.

“Children of immigrants have had that sense of belonging and full rights in the United States that they’ve been able to harness to really support their integration.”

A growing coalition of conservatives are trying to limit the number of people without legal status in the country with a different interpretation of the 14th Amendment.

Trump’s legal advisers encouraged him to challenge it. pregnant women were no longer on a list of “vulnerable” people after a rule change by the State Department that reduced the practice of traveling to the U.S. with the intention of giving birth.

Immigration re-emerged as a top issue as he campaigned during the 2024 election, with Trump vowing to voters that he would end birthright citizenship. He reiterated that goal during his first cable TV interview with NBC’s Meet the Press after the election.

During the 2023 GOP primary, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and then-candidate Vivek Ramaswamy and others also called for an end to birthright citizenship for the children of parents without legal status.

Legislators debated the issue. The House Judiciary committee in 2015 held a hearing on the subject of birthright citizenship legislation, introduced by former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz.

The idea that a president could take charge of removing citizenship888-607-ly is not good, according to a renowned immigration scholar. Her comments suggest legal challenges are likely.

does not automatically extend to persons born in the United States: (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States at the time of said person’s birth was lawful but temporary (such as, but not limited to, visiting the United States under the auspices of the Visa Waiver Program or visiting on a student, work, or tourist visa) and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.

But Stein and other advocates for limiting citizenship rights of children born to migrants said it’s likely this executive order will be overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The executive order has been challenged by two lawsuits. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and a host of other organizations filed a suit in a New Hampshire federal court on Monday night, hours after the order was announced. Attorneys general from 18 states — along with San Francisco and Washington, DC — filed a separate suit on Tuesday in a federal district court in Massachusetts.

“What the president did yesterday is unlawful, unconstitutional and it will not stand,” New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin said in an interview with NPR.

The Birthright Citizenship Case in New Jersey to California and the First Insights from the U.S. Senate in a State of Immigrants

We are a state of immigrants. A lot of people in the state obtained their citizenship through birthright citizenship. It’s the story of our state and our country and it’s in the U.S. Constitution for a reason.

Democratic state attorneys general from New Jersey to California signed on to the lawsuit filed Tuesday in Massachusetts. The city of San Francisco and Washington, D.C., also are suing.

Rob Bonta told President Trump at a press conference he’d see him in court.

The language was crafted and added to the Constitution to establish full citizenship rights for Black Americans, but it’s been interpreted for more than a century as also granting rights to all children born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents’ immigration status.

It’s ridiculous. We’re the only country in the world that does this [grants automatic citizenship], as you know,” Trump said Monday night while signing the order. In fact, dozens of other nations, including Canada and Mexico, have forms of birthright citizenship comparable to that in the U.S.

“I don’t think it’s going to be resolved in this administration, frankly, because I think the Supreme Court probably is going to rule in favor of the current practice,” said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that also supports strict controls on immigration.

Changing the U.S. constitution would require broad support, and a number of Democratic leaders indicated their opposition. In a statement released Monday, the governor of California said the order was unconstitutional.