Washington:

The debate over birthright citizenship has been rekindled, with President Donald Trump at the forefront. Trump has consistently argued that this provision was originally intended to benefit the children of slaves, not to provide a blanket opportunity for individuals worldwide to claim US citizenship.

“Birthright citizenship was, if you look back when this was passed and made, that was meant for the children of slaves. This was not meant for the whole world to come in and pile into the United States of America,” Trump made the statement in the Oval Office of the White House.

“Everybody coming in, and totally unqualified people with perhaps unqualified children. This wasn’t meant for that,” he said.

Trump emphasised that birthright citizenship was “meant for the children of slaves” and deemed it a “very good and noble” provision. However, he stressed that it was not intended for the global community to exploit. Trump asserted, “I’m in favor of that 100 per cent. But it wasn’t meant for the entire world to occupy the United States”.

The President’s stance on this issue has been consistent, and he’s taken concrete steps to challenge the status quo. On his first day in office, he issued an executive order aimed at revoking birthright citizenship, although it was swiftly struck down by a federal court in Seattle. Trump expressed confidence that the Supreme Court would ultimately rule in his favor.

Republican Senators Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz, and Katie Britt have introduced a bill that aligns with Trump’s views. The proposed legislation, titled the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025, aims to restrict birthright citizenship to children born to illegal immigrants and non-immigrants on temporary visas. The senators argue that the current policy is a significant draw for illegal immigration and poses a threat to national security.

The US is one of only 33 countries that do not impose restrictions on birthright citizenship. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, approximately 225,000 to 250,000 births in the US in 2023 were to illegal immigrants, accounting for nearly seven percent of total births.

The Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025 proposes to redefine eligibility criteria for citizenship by birth, limiting it to children with at least one parent who is a US citizen or national, a lawful permanent resident, or an alien serving in the armed forces. This legislation would only apply to children born after its enactment.
 

President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office at the White House, on January 30, 2025, in Washington.
| Photo Credit: AP

President Donald Trump has said that birthright citizenship was primarily intended for the children of slaves and not for the whole world to “come in and pile” into the U.S..

On the very first day of his inauguration, Trump issued an executive order against birthright citizenship, which was struck down by a federal court in Seattle the next day.

Also read: Is Trump’s order on birthright citizenship constitutional? | Explained

Trump has said that he would appeal against it. On Thursday, he exuded confidence that the Supreme Court would rule in his favour.

“Birthright citizenship was, if you look back when this was passed and made, that was meant for the children of slaves. This was not meant for the whole world to come in and pile into the United States of America,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office of the White House.

“Everybody coming in, and totally unqualified people with perhaps unqualified children. This wasn’t meant for that,” he said.

Asserting that it was meant for the children of slaves,” he said it was a “very good and noble” thing to do.

“I’m in favour of that 100 per cent. But it wasn’t meant for the entire world to occupy the United States,” Trump said.

“I just think that we’ll end up winning that in the Supreme Court. I think we’re going to win that case. I look forward to winning it.” “At that level, we’re the only country in the world that does this,” he said.

Early this week, a group of Republican Senators introduced a bill in the US Senate to restrict birthright citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants and non-immigrants on temporary visas.

According to Senators Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz and Katie Britt, who introduced the bill, the exploitation of birthright citizenship is a major pull factor for illegal immigration and a weakness for national security.

The U.S. is one of only 33 countries in the world with no restrictions on birthright citizenship, they said. The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that in 2023, there were 2,25,000 to 2,50,000 births to illegal immigrants, amounting to close to seven per cent of births in the US.

The Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025 specifies who can receive citizenship by virtue of their birth in the United States, including children born to at least one parent who is either a citizen or national of the U.S., a lawful permanent resident of the U.S., or an alien performing active service in the armed forces.

This bill only applies to children born after the date of enactment.

US President Donald Trump said Thursday his administration would appeal a federal judge’s ruling.

New Delhi:

After he was sworn in as the 47th President of the United States Monday, Donald Trump signed an executive order ending ‘birthright citizenship’, a 127-year-old amendment to the Constitution that guarantees American nationality to children born there, even if neither parent holds it.

The order – which has already been contested, in separate lawsuits filed by a coalition of 22 states and civil rights groups – was the opening shot in what will likely be a flurry of laws that will alter, dramatically, the United States’ immigration landscape, which was what Trump promised his voters.

Just how that landscape will change is anybody’s guess; Trump’s flurry will also include a clampdown on what the Republican has said as illegal immigration along the southern border, i.e., with Mexico.

But one impact – on Indian families living in that country, specifically those on temporary H1B or L1 visas, which do not grant permanent residency – is already being felt.

The C-Section Rush

Doctors and gynaecologists in the US are reporting a sudden increase in the number of pregnant Indian women, on such visas, asking for a caesarean, to ensure pre-term delivery of their children; i.e., before February 20, which is when Trump’s new mandate goes into effect.

The rush is because children born before that date will be granted citizenship, while those born after will not, subject to one big condition – they will only become citizens if at least one parent is already a citizen or a Green Card holder. If not, then out they go, when they turn 21.

To beat that, a report by The Times of India quoted Dr SD Roma in New Jersey as saying the majority of women lining up for a caesarean are in their eighth or ninth month of pregnancy.

“A seven-month pregnant woman came, with her husband, to sign up for a pre-term delivery. She isn’t due until sometime in March,” she told the publication.

Another medical professional, Dr SG Mukkala, an obstetrician and gynaecologist in Texas, said he has been advising similarly desperate couples of the dangers of a pre-term birth.

“Complications include underdeveloped lungs, feeding problems, low birth weight, neurological complications, and more… in the past two days I have spoken to 15-20 couples about this.”

Why The Panic For Indians?

At the heart of this panic is the fact that Indians in the US on H1B or L1 visas, of whom there are several lakhs, had anticipated being able to reside there for decades and have children, who would automatically become American citizens. But now that door is slowly swinging shut.

READ | How Trump’s Day 1 Order To End Birthright Citizenship Will Impact Indians

This won’t impact Green Card holders, whose children can still, even after Feb 20, be born as American citizens, but the waiting list for that oh-so valuable piece of paper is long, very long.

In fact, a million Indians are reportedly stuck in that queue, and there is no new about if, or when, many of those applications will be processed and that list reduce.

What it will impact is the children of Indians living on work visas, who will either have to self-deport, i.e., voluntarily return to their home nation, or apply for a visa to remain in the US.

What it will further impact is the entire family, since many will, naturally, elect to return with their children. Trump has acknowledged this, saying, “I don’t want to break up families”, but also declaring, “The only way you don’t… (is by) sending them all back”, suggesting there is no backdoor available.

What Is Birthright Citizenship?

Anyone born in the US is considered a citizen at birth.

This derives from the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which was added to the Constitution in 1868. The amendment states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

EXPLAINED | What Is US Birthright Citizenship And Can Trump End It

There are an estimated 13-14 million immigrants living, illegally, in the US, and their children, if born in that country, are considered American citizens. 

Can Trump Do This?

No president has ever tried to redefine the rules of citizenship using executive orders.

But Trump’s attempt to make history has put him on a collision course with the Supreme Court and, if that course holds, a landmark decision on who can, and who cannot, be an American citizen.

If courts decide to protect ‘birthright citizenship’, then only an amendment can change that.

But an amendment would require two-thirds of both houses and approval by three-quarters of state legislatures, a process that will likely take years, and that is something of which Trump will be aware.

This, then, is set to be a very long-term game, one that might extend beyond his second term.

The American Constitution has not been amended since 1992.

With input from agencies

NDTV is now available on WhatsApp channels. Click on the link to get all the latest updates from NDTV on your chat.

U.S. President Donald Trump.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

Indian-American lawmakers have opposed the executive order by U.S. President Donald Trump on changes in birthright citizenship, a move likely to hit not only illegal immigrants from around the world but also students and professionals from India.

On Monday (January 20, 2025,) in the opening hours of his second term as President, Mr. Trump signed an order declaring that future children born to undocumented immigrants would no longer be treated as citizens. The order would extend even to the children of some mothers in the country legally but temporarily, such as foreign students or tourists.

Mr. Trump’s executive order asserts that the children of such non-citizens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and thus are not covered by the 14^th Amendment’s longstanding constitutional guarantee.

Indian-American Congressman Ro Khanna said changes in birthright citizenship as done through the executive order would impact newborn babies of not only illegal and undocumented immigrants but also those staying in this country legally, such as on H-1B visas.

The H-1B visa is a non-immigrant visa that allows the U.S. companies to employ foreign workers in speciality occupations that require theoretical or technical expertise. Technology companies depend on it to hire tens of thousands of employees each year from countries such as India and China.

“Trump’s order removes birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. not just to undocumented parents but to ‘lawful’ immigrants who are temporarily on a student visa, H1B/H2B visa, or business visa. So much for the pretence that the Republicans are for legal immigration,” Mr. Khanna said.

Indians are the main beneficiaries of the H-1B visas, which bring in the best of the talent and brains from across the world. Highly skilled professionals from India walk away with the overwhelming number of H-1B visas — which is Congressional mandate — 6,50,000 every year and another 20,000 for those who received higher education from the U.S.

“No matter what Donald Trump says or does, birthright citizenship has and will be the law of the land. I will fight to protect it at all costs,” Indian American Congressman Shri Thanedar said.

Indian American Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal described it as unconstitutional. “Plain and simple this is unconstitutional and cannot be done with the stroke of a pen. If enacted, it would make a mockery of our country’s laws and the precedents set in the Constitution,” she said.

A coalition of immigration rights groups has challenged this in court and said this is unconstitutional.

‘I like both sides of argument on H-1B’, says Donald Trump

As per the executive order, the U.S. would not give automatic citizenship to newborn babies after February 19, 2025, if one of the parents is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.

Also, attorneys general from 22 states sued President Trump in two federal district courts on Tuesday (January 21, 2025) to block the executive order that refuses to recognise the U.S.-born children of unauthorised immigrants as citizens, the New York Times reported.

Eighteen states and two cities, San Francisco and Washington DC, challenged the order in the Federal District Court in Massachusetts, arguing that birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment is “automatic” and that neither the President nor Congress has the constitutional authority to revise it. Four other states filed a second lawsuit in the Western District of Washington.

The states request immediate relief to prevent the President’s Order from taking effect through both a Temporary Restraining Order and a Preliminary Injunction. “President Trump’s attempt to unilaterally end birthright citizenship is a flagrant violation of our Constitution,” said New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin.

“The President’s executive order attempting to rescind birthright citizenship is blatantly unconstitutional and quite frankly, un-American,” said California Attorney General Rob Bonta.

Ajay Bhutoria, Biden White House Commissioner and Deputy National Finance Chair for the Democratic Party, in a statement, said, the 14th Amendment is not up for negotiation.

“This executive order is not only unconstitutional but also undermines the values of equality and justice that define America,” he said. Mr. Bhutoria urged the South Asian and broader immigrant communities to stand united against policies that threaten the fundamental principles of the Constitution.

“We must work together to ensure that these divisive and unconstitutional actions do not succeed,” he said.

Washington DC:

US President Donald Trump has been sued by a coalition of Democratic-leaning states and civil rights groups over his plan to end birthright citizenship in the United States. Several separate lawsuits came within hours after Trump took office and quickly unveiled a phalanx of executive orders he hopes will reshape American immigration.

The first two cases were filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, immigrant organizations and an expectant mother in the hours after Trump signed the executive order, kicking off the first major court fight of his administration.

The two other lawsuits were brought by 22 Democratic-led states along with the District of Columbia and the city of San Francisco, in federal courts in Boston and Seattle. The cases asserted that the President had overstepped his authority and violated the US Constitution by trying to eliminate the automatic granting of citizenship to anyone born on US soil.

If allowed to stand, Trump’s order would for the first time deny more than 150,000 children born annually in the United States the right to citizenship, said the office of Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell.

“President Trump does not have the authority to take away constitutional rights,” she said in a statement.

What Is Birthright Citizenship?

Anyone born in the United States is considered a citizen at birth, which derives from the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment which was added to the US Constitution in 1868. 

The amendment states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 also defines citizens and includes similar language.

The 14th Amendment was confirmed in the US Constitution in 1868, after the four years of the American Civil War, to overturn the Supreme Court decision Dred Scott v. Sandford, which denied basic rights to African Americans. The previous judgement said that enslaved people were not US citizens and, therefore, could not expect any protection from the federal government or the courts.

The US Supreme Court affirmed that birthright citizenship applies to the children of immigrants in 1898 in the Wong Kim Ark v United States ruling. Wong, who was born to Chinese immigrants in the US, was denied re-entry when he returned to the US from a visit to China. Wong successfully argued that because he was born in the US, his parents’ immigration status did not affect the application of the 14th Amendment in his case.

The case affirmed that regardless of race or the immigration status of one’s parents, all children born in the United States were entitled to all of the rights that citizenship offered. 

However, the Supreme Court has not addressed whether the Citizenship Clause applies to US-born children of people who are in the United States illegally.

What Does Trump’s Executive Order Say?

Donald Trump’s order declared that individuals born in the United States are not entitled to automatic citizenship if the mother was in the country unlawfully and the father was not a citizen or lawful permanent resident. It also declared citizenship would be denied to those whose mother was in the United States lawfully but temporarily, such as those on student or tourist visas, and whose father was not a citizen or lawful permanent resident.

Trump has complained about foreign women visiting the United States for the purpose of giving birth and conferring US citizenship on their offspring.

There were an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in America in January 2022, according to a US Department of Homeland Security estimate, a figure that some analysts now place at 13 million to 14 million. Their US-born children are considered by the government to have US citizenship. 

Losing out on citizenship would prevent these individuals from having access to federal programs like Medicaid health insurance and, when they become older, from working lawfully or voting, the states said in the lawsuits.

Can Trump’s Order Overturn Birthright Citizenship?

According to legal experts, birthright citizenship can not be ended by an executive order as it is bound to end up in litigation. 

“He’s doing something that’s going to upset a lot of people, but ultimately this will be decided by the courts…This is not something he can decide on his own,” Saikrishna Prakash, a constitutional expert and University of Virginia Law School professor said, according to a report by BBC. 

Mr Prakash noted that while Trump can order employees of federal agencies to interpret citizenship more narrowly, it would trigger legal challenges from anyone whose citizenship is denied. This could lead to a lengthy court battle ultimately winding up at the US Supreme Court.

A constitutional amendment could do away with birthright citizenship, but that would also require a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate and approval by three-quarters of US states. Republicans have a 53 to 47 majority in the Senate and a 220 to 215 majority in the House, meaning America’s grand old party (GOP) does not have the required number in either chamber.

Cases Against Trump’s Order

Three of the four lawsuits against Trump’s order were filed in Massachusetts and New Hampshire. Any rulings from judges in those New England states would be reviewed by the Boston-based 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals, the only federal appeals court whose active judges are all Democratic appointees, according to a report by Reuters. 

Four states filed a separate case in Washington state, which the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals has jurisdiction over. US District Judge John Coughenour in Seattle has scheduled a Thursday hearing on whether he should issue a temporary restraining order blocking enforcement of Trump’s order.

A fifth lawsuit was filed in federal court in Maryland by a group of pregnant women and immigrant rights groups including CASA.

The various lawsuits argue that Trump’s executive order violated the right enshrined in the Citizenship Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment which provides that anyone born in the United States is considered a citizen.

The complaints cite the US Supreme Court’s 1898 ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, a decision holding that children born in the United States to non-citizen parents are entitled to U.S. citizenship. The plaintiffs challenging the order include a woman living in Massachusetts identified only as “O. Doe” who is in the country through temporary protected status and is due to give birth in March.

Temporary protected status is available to people whose home countries have experienced natural disasters, armed conflicts or other extraordinary events and currently covers more than 1 million people from 17 nations.

Several other lawsuits challenging aspects of Trump’s other early executive actions are also pending.

The National Treasury Employees Union, which represents federal government employees in 37 agencies and departments, late on Monday filed a lawsuit challenging an order Trump signed that makes it easier to fire thousands of federal agency employees and replace them with political loyalists.