The Supreme Court and Birthright Citizenship

This week, the United States Supreme Court is hearing a landmark case that could change the definition of what it means to be a U.S. citizen. With Trump v. Barbara, the Court will decide if the children of immigrants who are in the country illegally or temporarily should be automatically granted citizenship, as they have been in the past. Here, Election Central takes a closer look at what’s at stake with this historic decision.  

What Does “Birthright Citizenship” Mean? 

Currently, there are several paths to becoming a U.S. citizen. One of them is to be born on United States soil. According to the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, any baby born in the U.S. is automatically a U.S. citizen. Over thirty other countries in the world have similar “birthright citizenship” provisions, including Canada and Mexico. 

After the Revolutionary War, citizenship was more widely granted, even to people who had been loyal to the British in the war. Early American leaders wanted to increase the nation’s population. Birthright citizenship didn’t become a legal principle in the United States until after the Civil War. In 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment was added to the Constitution to reverse the earlier Dred Scott decision that had declared slaves to be non-citizens. The Fourteenth Amendment states that anyone born or naturalized in the United States is a U.S. citizen.  

Trump’s Challenge 

On the first day of President Trump’s second term, he issued an executive order called “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.” It said that the Fourteenth Amendment does not apply to a baby whose parents had entered the United States illegally, or who were in the U.S. legally but temporarily (such as international students, or people on work visas). Trump’s executive order was challenged by federal judges around the country, which is how the case has now found its way to the Supreme Court.  

The Trump administration argument is entering the country illegally is, by definition, a crime. So, children of those immigrants do not meet the qualifications for citizenship. Those opposed to birthright citizenship also argue that the policy can be seen as a motivator to enter the country illegally to achieve citizenship for new births.  

The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that only about 25,000 babies are born this way each year, which is just a small percentage of the 3.6 million annual U.S. births. 

What Will Happen? 

If the Supreme Court rules to eliminate birthright citizenship, tens of thousands of U.S.-born babies would immediately lose their citizenship. Many of these children could then lack citizenship anywhere. Their parents’ home countries might not consider the children to be citizens either, since they weren’t born in that country. This could create a growing class of “stateless” people who are living in the U.S. with no path to citizenship and no “home” country to return to. It would also technically raise the number of people living in the U.S. illegally.   

Dig Deeper A key decision that has been the focus of much discussion before the Court is the 1898 case of Wong Kim Ark. Use internet resources to learn more about this case and write a paragraph about what you learn. How does this case apply to Trump v. Barbara today?