Can targeting birth tourism successfully redefine the boundaries of the 14th Amendment without triggering an unprecedented constitutional showdown?

Question

Accepted Answer

Probably not. Targeting birth tourism may survive as an immigration-enforcement policy in part, but it is unlikely to redraw the constitutional line of the 14th Amendment without inviting swift court challenges. The key obstacle is the Supreme Court’s June ruling in Trump v. Barbara. The Court held that children born in the United States to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present are citizens at birth under the Citizenship Clause. The majority relied on common-law jus soli, the history of the 14th Amendment, and Wong Kim Ark, and recognized only narrow historical exceptions such as children of diplomats or enemy occupiers. That leaves some room for the administration to act against visa fraud. A policy denying visas, revoking travel authorization, or prosecuting operators who arrange travel primarily to give birth could fit within existing executive authority over entry and immigration enforcement. Several legal analysts say the president likely has more power to restrict or punish fraudulent travel than to deny citizenship after a child is born. But the new order goes further by tying alleged “commercial transactions” or fraudulent entry to a child’s citizenship status. That is where the strategy becomes vulnerable. The Court’s ruling suggests parental motive, temporary presence, or unlawful entry do not defeat citizenship if the child is born on U.S. soil and the parents are subject to U.S. law. So the likely outcome is a split one: tougher scrutiny of suspected …

Trump Revives 3 Blocked Policies After Supreme Court Rulings

Sources

Sources

Trump Revives 3 Blocked Policies After Supreme Court Rulings

Summary

Sources

Insights

Related Stories

Sources

Related Stories