Beginning his second term, US president Donald Trump has already pursued a series of executive actions aimed at restricting immigrant rights and support for immigrant populations — including a smackdown on birthright citizenship, which grants automatic citizenship to children born on US soil, regardless of the immigration status of their parents.
Trump has focused on limiting the scope of the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause. The idea is to reinterpret the constitutional provision to exclude those born to undocumented immigrants or non-citizen parents unless specific criteria are met.
One of his key proposals seeks to exclude children born in the US to parents who are not subject to US jurisdiction, such as diplomats or foreign government officials.
However, the move faces significant legal hurdles, as the 14th Amendment has been a cornerstone of American citizenship law since it was ratified in 1868.
Critics argued that Trump’s executive actions would need to be addressed through constitutional amendments or a Supreme Court ruling to overturn established precedent. As such, while the executive order has initiated the discussion, it is unlikely to result in immediate change on the ground without further legislative or judicial actions.
1/2 Eliminating #BirthrightCitizenship would create a permanent underclass and leave children stateless. Birthright citizenship strengthens our nation, not weakens it. pic.twitter.com/TKttQONmaH
— American Immigration Council (@immcouncil) January 21, 2025
In accordance, several states are up in arms already, working to initiate legislative action or judicial review to block the substantial changes this would entail for the legal status of ‘birthright citizenship’ in the US.
Reuter reports that attorney generals of 22 Democrat-led states have already filed suits collectively in the Boston and Seattle federal courts, holding that the POTUS has violated the US Constitution. So have the city of San Francisco and District of Columbia.
Unsurprisingly, several of the litigants If president Donald Trump’s efforts to revoke or limit birthright citizenship were to succeed, it could have significant consequences for many immigrant communities in the U.S., including the Indian-American community.
As one of the fastest-growing immigrant populations in the U.S., Indian-Americans often have children who are born in the U.S. and thus currently benefit from automatic citizenship under the 14th Amendment.
Should this change come to pass, the impact would be particularly profound for Indian-American families, as it could mean that children born to non-citizen parents — who are often here on work visas or as green card holders — would no longer automatically be granted US citizenship.
If allowed to stand, Trump’s order would, for the very first time in US history — the history of a nation very literally founded on immigration — 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.
This could create a range of legal and social challenges for families, including:
-
Citizenship and legal status: Children who are born in the U.S. but do not automatically receive citizenship could face issues related to education, healthcare, and employment, as citizenship often facilitates access to many social services and rights.
-
Family reunification: Many families might find it more difficult to navigate immigration systems, especially if children born in the U.S. no longer have the automatic right to sponsor relatives for permanent residency.
-
Uncertainty and anxiety: The shift would create uncertainty and anxiety within the community, as families would have to reconsider the legal status of their children and their own status in the U.S.
-
Social and cultural impact: The Indian-American community, like many other immigrant groups, may feel a sense of exclusion or alienation if policies are implemented that undermine their children’s legal status or sense of belonging.
Although actually carrying out the change faces significant legal hurdles, including potential constitutional amendments or rulings, the Indian-American community would be a major group affected by the policy shift, given the high number of families in the US on work visas or temporary resident status.
Unsurprisingly, then, two cases were filed in anticipation by the American Civil Liberties Union, some immigrant organisations and an expectant mother as well… just before the POTUS signed the order!
As of 2024, Indian Americans have grown to over 5.4 million as a population, making up approximately 1.47 per cent of the total US population, according to the US Census Bureau.
This demographic is notably diverse, with around two-thirds of Indian Americans being first-generation immigrants, while the remaining third are US-born citizens. That last is the set disrupted by this order.
In the executive order, the Trump administration labelled birthright citizenship ‘ridiculous’ and argued that ending it would help curb illegal immigration.
However, the Trump administration’s stance challenges this broad interpretation, suggesting that birthright citizenship should not apply to children born to parents who are in the country unlawfully or who are not subject to US jurisdiction.
By framing the change as a measure to address illegal immigration, the administration argues that ending birthright citizenship would prevent individuals from using US birth as a way to anchor immigration status and potentially gain citizenship for their families. This policy proposal aligns with Trump’s broader anti-immigration agenda, which seeks to reduce both legal and illegal immigration to the US.
President Trump’s statement in the order that ‘The 14th Amendment has never been interpreted [emphasis this author’s] to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States’ reflects his administration’s belief that the constitutional provision should be reinterpreted to exclude certain groups, such as children born to undocumented immigrants — and disregards all legal precedent to the contrary.
The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, has historically been understood to grant automatic citizenship to anyone born on US soil, with a few exceptions (such as children of foreign diplomats or occupying foreign military personnel).
However, Trump’s proposed reinterpretation of the 14th Amendment has been met with strong opposition from legal experts, lawmakers and civil rights advocates. They argue that the 14th Amendment’s language clearly grants citizenship to anyone born on US soil and that any attempt to restrict it would require a Constitutional amendment or a Supreme Court ruling.
The legal suits already in play are based on the argument that birthright citizenship, as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, is automatic and cannot be altered by the executive branch of government or the US Congress. The plaintiffs in these cases argue that this Constitutional provision is perfectly clear and cannot be amended or repealed by executive order.
The lawsuits were filed in the federal district court in Massachusetts, where 18 states and the two cities challenged the order, and in the Western District of Washington, where four additional states joined the case.
