Birthright Citizenship

Birthright Citizenship

What Is Birthright Citizenship?

Birthright citizenship is the principle that people born in the United States are Americans—full members of our society from the moment they are born. It reflects a simple and powerful idea: if you’re born here, you belong here. In the United States, birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, adopted in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War. 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.”
This constitutional guarantee was intentionally written to ensure equality under the law, regardless of race, ancestry, or parentage. It was enacted to overturn the Supreme Court’s infamous 1857 Dred Scott decision, which had declared that Black people born in the United States could never be citizens.

How Birthright Citizenship Works in the United States

The United States recognizes two primary paths to citizenship at birth:

Birthplace‑Based Citizenship (Jus Soli)

The U.S. follows a principle known as jus soli, or “right of the soil,” meaning that nearly everyone born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. The Supreme Court confirmed this interpretation over a century ago, in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), holding that children born in the U.S. to immigrant parents are citizens at birth. The only narrow exceptions are children born to foreign diplomats, who are not considered “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States.

Ancestry‑Based Citizenship (Jus Sanguinis)

U.S. law also allows children born abroad to U.S. citizens to acquire citizenship through their parents, provided certain legal requirements are met. Together, these rules create a clear, fair, and race‑neutral standard for who is an American—one that does not depend on lineage, wealth, or skin color.

Why Birthright Citizenship Matters

It Guarantees Equality and Prevents a Two‑Tiered Society

Birthright citizenship ensures that all people born in the United States are treated equally under the law. Weakening or ending this principle would create a dangerous two‑tiered system in which some U.S.‑born children could be denied citizenship because of who their parents are. Millions of U.S. citizen children have at least one immigrant parent. Stripping birthright citizenship could leave many children stateless or vulnerable to deportation from the only country they have ever known.

It Strengthens Belonging and Social Cohesion

Birthright citizenship promotes a shared sense of belonging. When people are recognized as full members of society, they are more likely to invest in their communities, pursue education and careers, and participate in civic life. This inclusion strengthens democracy and brings communities together. Creating a permanent subclass of people who grow up in the U.S. but are denied full membership undermines national unity and weakens the social fabric.

It Reflects Core American Values

Birthright citizenship embodies deeply held American ideals of fairness, opportunity, and non‑discrimination. It affirms that citizenship is not inherited through bloodlines or ancestry, but grounded in shared commitment and equal rights. Most countries in the Western Hemisphere recognize some form of birthright citizenship. Ending it would make the United States an outlier and betray a long‑standing constitutional tradition.

Birthright Citizenship and the Courts Today

Birthright citizenship has been settled law for more than 125 years. Ending or limiting it would require either:
  • A constitutional amendment (which requires approval by two‑thirds of Congress and ratification by three‑quarters of the states), or
  • A radical departure by the Supreme Court from long‑standing precedent interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment.
While political actors have periodically called for restricting birthright citizenship through legislation or executive action, such efforts would conflict with the Constitution as it has consistently been interpreted. As courts consider renewed challenges, what is at stake is not just a legal doctrine—but a foundational promise of equality and belonging.

Bottom Line

Birthright citizenship provides a simple, fair, and unifying rule: if you are born in the United States, you are an American. It ensures equal treatment under the law, prevents statelessness, strengthens communities, and reflects our nation’s highest ideals. Protecting birthright citizenship means protecting the idea that everyone belongs—and that our future is stronger when we uphold equality for all.

Supreme Court Expresses Skepticism at Trump’s Effort to Eliminate Birthright Citizenship

Over 150 years ago, with the embers of the Civil War still smoldering, members of Congress gathered to write the 14th Amendment.…

Read More Written

Breaking Down Trump’s Attempt to End Birthright Citizenship

On his first day in office, President Donald Trump issued an executive order aimed…

Read More Written

What Does the Supreme Court Ruling on Birthright Citizenship Mean?

The Supreme Court issued a decision in the CASA v. Trump case on Friday,…

Read More Written
“Anchor Baby” Added to New American Heritage Dictionary

“Anchor Baby” Added to New American Heritage Dictionary

The degree to which the immigration debate has coarsened over the last few years is no more evident than in the pages of the recently released fifth edition of the New American Heritage Dictionary. Among the new entries is the term “anchor baby.” You might think that the definition would read something like: slang, a pejorative description of a child born in the United States to parents without legal status, implying that the parents intend to leverage the child’s citizenship to “anchor” their own presence in the U.S.”  You would be wrong. Read More

Restrictionist Group Strikes Out in Latest Report on Children of Diplomats

Restrictionist Group Strikes Out in Latest Report on Children of Diplomats

BY MARGARET D. STOCK, COUNSEL TO THE FIRM, LANE POWELL PC The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has been known for coming out with some odd reports over the years—but their latest is notable for its factual and legal flaws—and for argument that we should expand several different government bureaucracies to chase down the dozen or so children born in the U.S. each year to diplomats with immunity. The CIS report, “Birthright Citizenship for the Children of Diplomats?,” is about the one group of people that everyone agrees is exempted from birthright citizenship—the children born to foreign diplomats. It claims that, even though these people are not U.S. citizens, they are de facto citizens because they are able to receive Social Security numbers. If you look at the facts, their argument doesn't hold water. Read More

Report on Birthright Citizenship Low on Facts, High on Fantasy

Report on Birthright Citizenship Low on Facts, High on Fantasy

Sometimes it’s easy to miss the most outlandish and unrealistic statements made in the immigration debate given the level of dialed up rhetoric. A recent report from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), however, appears to have been written to test just how far into the realm of fantasy the debate can be taken. In Birthright Citizenship for the Children of Visitors: A National Security Problem in the Making?, author W.D. Reasoner (a pseudonym) makes so many preposterous assumptions and calculations that one wonders whether the author used an alias to avoid embarrassment. Read More

Some States Applying Brakes to Legislation Denying Citizenship to U.S.-Born Children

Some States Applying Brakes to Legislation Denying Citizenship to U.S.-Born Children

Yesterday, a panel in South Dakota’s legislature voted to halt legislation aimed at denying citizenship to U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants. South Dakota’s bill—and others like it—propose measures which challenge the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, which states that, with very few exceptions, all persons born in the U.S. are U.S. citizens, regardless of the immigration status of their parents. While conservative lawmakers continue to introduce bills challenging the birthright citizenship clause, other states—like Arizona and Montana—are joining South Dakota's lead in deciding whether to move these bills forward. Read More

What Does the Vitter-Paul Resolution to Amend the Constitution Solve, Exactly?

What Does the Vitter-Paul Resolution to Amend the Constitution Solve, Exactly?

Senator David Vitter (R-LA). Photo by SIR: Poseyal. In the latest attack on the Constitution and U.S. citizenship, Senators David Vitter (R-LA) and Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced a resolution (S. J. RES. 2) last week proposing an amendment to the constitution to limit citizenship to children born in the U.S. if 1) one parent is a U.S. citizen, 2) one parent is a legal permanent resident residing in the U.S., or 3) one parent is on active duty in the U.S. military. Arizona State Rep. Kavanaugh also introduced two bills last week attempting to deny citizenship to children born in the state to undocumented immigrants and require state officials to issue distinctive looking birth certificates to those children the state does not consider citizens. While these bills might make for splashy headlines, they do nothing to end undocumented immigration. In fact, it would make life more difficult for every person in the U.S., who would then have to prove their citizenship status in order to determine the status of their newborns. Read More

A One-Man Wrecking Crew: New Report Details the Costly Career of Kris Kobach

A One-Man Wrecking Crew: New Report Details the Costly Career of Kris Kobach

It is hardly surprising that the newly elected Kansas secretary of state, Kris Kobach, ran an election campaign which featured the baseless claim that “the illegal registration of alien voters has become pervasive” in the state. As a new report from the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) describes in detail, Kobach has built a long and varied career out of attacking immigrants; first in the Bush Administration, targeting legal immigrants from Muslim and Arab countries, and later as the architect of city ordinances and state laws targeting unauthorized, mostly Latino immigrants. Yet, while Kobach’s anti-immigrant initiatives have served to advance him politically and financially, virtually all of them have ended up being costly failures for which taxpayers ultimately foot the bill. Read More

The Emperor (and the Anti-Fourteenth Amendment Crowd) Have No Clothes

The Emperor (and the Anti-Fourteenth Amendment Crowd) Have No Clothes

What a difference a few weeks can make. Just last month, the papers were filled with stories about the amazing feats of DREAM Act students, whose commitment and love for this country is boundless, even as they risk deportation in order to tell their stories. This week, the papers are filled with stories of vicious state legislators who want to turn back the clock on civil rights by stopping “an invasion of illegal aliens” through an end to birthright citizenship. Where the DREAM Act movement is about hope and opportunity, this ugly new attempt to change the Fourteenth Amendment is about hate and deprivation. Read More

Legislators Intend to Burden States with Costly Immigration Litigation

Legislators Intend to Burden States with Costly Immigration Litigation

State Legislators for Legal Immigration member, State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe (R-PA) Yesterday, a group of state legislators gathered in a small room in Washington, D.C. to present their plan for reinterpreting the 14th Amendment—the amendment which states that all persons born in the U.S., and subject to jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of U.S. and the states in which they reside. Although the legislators proclaimed a desire to “protect the states” and to “love" the 14th Amendment, which was adopted after the Civil War to guarantee citizenship to the American-born children of freed slaves, you wouldn’t know it listening by to their blatant disregard for the American taxpayer—upon whom they plan on sticking costly litigation fees. Chairman of the House Immigration Subcommittee, Congressman Steve King (R-IA), also introduced a bill in the new Congress to end constitution citizenship. Read More

State Legislators Attempt to Turn Back Clock to Antebellum South

State Legislators Attempt to Turn Back Clock to Antebellum South

At a press conference this morning at the National Press Club, a coalition of state legislators and immigration restrictionists known as the State Legislators for Legal Immigration (SLLI) presented their proposal to turn back the clocks to the pre-Civil War era to create a new definition of “state citizenship,” create a new second-class citizenship, and fundamentally alter the principles of the U.S. Constitution. With connections to restrictionist group FAIR and the notorious John Tanton Network, SLLI members Rep. John Kavanaugh of Arizona, Rep. Daryl Metcalfe of Pennsylvania, Kansas Secretary of State-elect Kris Kobach and others were on hand to monger more fear on “the illegal alien invasion” and, in the words of South Carolina’s state Senator Danny Verdin, cure the “malady” and “poison” of undocumented immigration. Read More

More Election Time Anti-Immigrant Antics

More Election Time Anti-Immigrant Antics

There are several things the public can count on each election season—a deluge of non-stop political advertising, daily tracking polls, and now to an increasing degree, false claims about immigrants by politicians looking for a cheap way to score political points. Read More

All gifts are matched dollar for dollar up to $75,000

No one should face the immigration system alone

logoimg