Omar Bennett
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees birthright citizenship to every child born within the jurisdiction of the United States. The interpretation of the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment has been a subject of debate, with some arguing that it does not extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States. This interpretation has been challenged by legal scholars and the Supreme Court, who have upheld the principle of birthright citizenship for children born in the United States, regardless of their parents' immigration or citizenship status. The Fourteenth Amendment and its interpretations have been at the centre of discussions around birthright citizenship in the United States, with some seeking to restrict or revoke it.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Citizenship Clause | "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." |
| Date of Adoption | July 9, 1868 |
| Exceptions | Foreign diplomats, members of occupying foreign forces, members of Indian tribes, children born to foreign parents on foreign warships in U.S. ports |
| Loss of Birthright Citizenship | Voluntary relinquishment of citizenship by declaring allegiance to a foreign state, formally renouncing U.S. nationality, committing treason, or attempting to overthrow the U.S. |
| Revoking Birthright Citizenship | Requires amending the U.S. Constitution or diverging from legal principles and precedent |
Explore related products
$18.44 $24
What You'll Learn
The Fourteenth Amendment
The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship to every child born "within the jurisdiction of the United States". The exact wording of the relevant portion is: "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." This clause overruled the Supreme Court's Dred Scott decision, which ruled that African Americans could not become citizens. The Citizenship Clause also constitutionalized the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which granted citizenship to all born within the United States, except the children of foreign diplomats.
While most legal scholars interpret the Fourteenth Amendment as extending birthright citizenship to anyone born in the United States, there have been attempts to restrict it, particularly for children of undocumented immigrants or those on temporary visas. In January 2025, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 14160, seeking to deny birthright citizenship to these children. However, multiple federal judges blocked the order as unconstitutional, and it has not been enforced.
The Elastic Clause: Stretching the Constitution's Flexibility
You may want to see also
Citizenship Clause
The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship to every child born "within the jurisdiction of the United States". The Fourteenth 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 Fourteenth Amendment was adopted on July 9, 1868, and since then, the citizenship of persons born in the United States has been controlled by its Citizenship Clause. The Amendment repudiated the Supreme Court's decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford, which misinterpreted the Constitution as excluding people of African descent from eligibility for citizenship based on their race.
The Citizenship Clause has been interpreted to mean that constitutional birthright citizenship does not depend on the immigration status of one's parents. This interpretation was confirmed by the 1898 Supreme Court case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which established that children born in the U.S. to immigrant parents are citizens, regardless of their parents' immigration status. This precedent was further supported by multiple cases in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries, which recognized only three narrow exceptions to birthright citizenship: diplomatic children, tribal Indians, and invading armies.
While birthright citizenship is a well-established principle, there have been recent attempts to restrict it, particularly for children born to undocumented immigrants. For example, President Donald Trump issued an executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship for babies of undocumented immigrants. However, legal scholars argue that revoking this right would require amending the Constitution or diverging from established precedent and legal principles.
The Constitution's Electoral College: Why and How?
You may want to see also
Supreme Court precedent
Birthright citizenship was added to the US Constitution in 1868 with the 14th Amendment, which 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 Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld birthright citizenship in its rulings. In 1898, the Supreme Court case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark established an important precedent in its interpretation of the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, cementing birthright citizenship for children of all immigrants. The ruling clarified that children born in the US to immigrant parents are citizens, regardless of their parents' immigration status.
In 1982, the Supreme Court interpreted a separate but similar clause of the 14th Amendment in Plyler v. Doe. The justices ruled that a Texas law barring undocumented immigrants from attending public school violated the amendment's provision prohibiting a state from denying "to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The court rejected the argument that undocumented immigrants were not "persons within its jurisdiction" and therefore not covered by the equal protection clause.
In 2025, the Supreme Court was set to hear arguments on three consolidated birthright citizenship cases, challenging an executive order by President Trump that sought to redefine birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment. The order asserted that the 14th Amendment does not extend citizenship to everyone born in the US, excluding those not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the US. However, legal scholars and judges have argued that the Supreme Court has consistently rejected such interpretations, and any changes to birthright citizenship would require amending the Constitution.
Exploring Supreme Court Duties: Constitutional Focus
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Anti-immigrant political factions
In recent times, the anti-immigrant movement in the United States has gained significant traction, with the success of nativist politicians like former President Donald Trump, Steve Bannon, and Jeff Sessions. Trump, in particular, embraced nativist rhetoric during his presidential campaign, contributing to the rise of anti-immigrant sentiments. Organizations such as FAIR, CIS, and NumbersUSA played a significant role in lobbying for policies aligned with their agenda during the Trump administration.
These anti-immigrant factions have actively sought to restrict birthright citizenship, which is guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. They have primarily targeted children born to undocumented immigrant parents, attempting to deny them citizenship despite the precedent set by the 1898 Supreme Court case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark. This case established that children born in the U.S. to immigrant parents are citizens, regardless of their parents' immigration status.
The efforts of anti-immigrant factions have resulted in legal challenges and executive orders aimed at ending birthright citizenship. President Trump, for instance, issued an executive order on his first day in office, targeting birthright citizenship for babies of undocumented immigrants. However, these attempts have faced legal obstacles, with federal judges blocking the implementation of such orders.
It is important to note that anti-immigrant sentiments are not unique to the United States. Studies have shown that rapid ethnic changes, as seen in the United Kingdom and Denmark, can increase opposition to immigration and support for anti-immigrant political parties. Levels of education also play a role, with higher education levels generally associated with more positive attitudes toward immigrants.
Sugar Twins: Glucosamine and Galactosamine's Isomeric Identity
You may want to see also
Revoking birthright citizenship
The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees birthright citizenship to every child born "within the jurisdiction of the United States" regardless of their parent's immigration or citizenship status. This was established in the 1898 Supreme Court case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which ruled that birthright citizenship applies to the children of immigrants.
However, there have been recent attempts to revoke birthright citizenship, primarily by former President Donald Trump, who issued an executive order on his first day in office in 2025, aimed at ending birthright citizenship for babies of undocumented immigrants or those with temporary status. This order was blocked by the courts and was deemed unconstitutional by legal scholars.
The consequences of ending birthright citizenship could be far-reaching and detrimental. It would create a subclass of people born in the U.S. who are denied full rights and protections, including access to critical federal benefits. It could also increase the population of undocumented people in the country, potentially leading to issues of statelessness and exploitation.
Supporters of birthright citizenship argue that it has been a fundamental part of U.S. law for over a century and that eliminating it would weaken the very foundation of American democracy and the rights it upholds.
Supreme Court's Jurisdiction: Beyond Constitutional Issues
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Birthright citizenship is a legal principle under which citizenship is automatically granted to individuals upon birth.
In the United States, birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. Specifically, it states that "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."
Under current law, loss of birthright citizenship could only occur through voluntary relinquishment of citizenship via acts that include but are not limited to: declaring allegiance to a foreign state, formally renouncing U.S. nationality, or committing treason.
No. The president has no authority to change the citizenship rule at all. Congress can change the rule, but only to the extent of making it broader.
Birthright citizenship, like much United States law, has its roots in English common law. Calvin's Case, 77 Eng. Rep. 377 (1608), established that "a person's status was vested at birth, and based upon place of birth—a person born within the king's dominion owed allegiance to the sovereign, and in turn, was entitled to the king's protection".
