In a recent interview with NBC News’ Meet the Press, President-elect Donald Trump revealed plans to end the United States’ practice of granting birthright citizenship, a provision enshrined in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Trump emphasized his commitment to reforming immigration policies, suggesting that he will work with Congress to address this issue legislatively. The potential policy change could have significant implications for children born on U.S. soil to undocumented parents, shifting the landscape of citizenship rights in the country.
Birthright citizenship, which grants automatic U.S. citizenship to any child born within the country’s borders, is rooted in the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868. This provision was initially enacted to ensure equal rights for newly freed slaves but has since become a cornerstone of American immigration law. Under this rule, the children of both documented and undocumented immigrants born in the U.S. are granted citizenship, regardless of their parents’ legal status.
Trump’s proposal to end birthright citizenship would represent a dramatic departure from longstanding U.S. policy. In his Meet the Press interview, he stated, “We’re going to have to get it changed. We’ll maybe have to go back to the people.” The president-elect emphasized that such a change could involve a constitutional amendment or new legislation. He also made clear his stance on deporting undocumented individuals, asserting that “you have no choice” but to remove anyone illegally in the country.
Trump’s stance aligns with his broader immigration strategy, which includes prioritizing the deportation of individuals with criminal records and reforming the country’s immigration laws to curb illegal immigration. While Trump signaled his openness to working with Democrats on immigration reform, it remains to be seen whether such a significant shift will gain traction in Congress.
The United States is one of the few industrialized nations that offers birthright citizenship. However, several countries around the world still grant citizenship to children born on their soil, often referred to as jus soli laws. Here’s a look at some of the countries where birthright citizenship remains intact:
- Canada: Similar to the U.S., Canada offers automatic citizenship to children born within its borders, regardless of their parents’ immigration status.
- Mexico: Birthright citizenship is enshrined in Mexico’s constitution, and any child born on Mexican soil automatically receives citizenship.
- Argentina: Under Argentine law, any child born in the country, including children of foreign nationals, is granted Argentine citizenship.
- Brazil: Brazil has a strong tradition of birthright citizenship, which is protected by its constitution.
However, many other countries, particularly in Europe and Asia, do not grant birthright citizenship. Instead, they follow jus sanguinis (right of blood), where nationality is determined by the citizenship of the parents rather than the place of birth.
The debate surrounding birthright citizenship is not new, but it has gained momentum in recent years, particularly among conservative lawmakers and pundits. Advocates for ending the practice argue that it encourages illegal immigration, as undocumented individuals may be motivated to enter the U.S. with the hope that their children will gain citizenship. Opponents, however, argue that birthright citizenship is an essential part of U.S. values, ensuring equality and fairness, and preventing discrimination against children born in the country.
The timing of Trump’s proposal is significant, as it comes amidst broader immigration reform discussions. The incoming administration has expressed interest in revising U.S. immigration laws, including the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and visa policies. As the debate continues, Americans will likely see intense discussions over the future of immigration and citizenship in the U.S.
While the path to ending birthright citizenship is unclear, any move to alter the 14th Amendment would require a lengthy and complex process. A constitutional amendment would need to be approved by a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate, followed by ratification by three-fourths of the states. Alternatively, Congress could pass legislation that directly challenges the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, but such a law could face significant legal challenges.
For now, the fate of birthright citizenship remains uncertain. The debate over this issue will likely be a defining feature of the upcoming administration’s immigration policy.
Read more: