As the nation grapples with changing immigration policies, one executive order by President Donald Trump is stirring deep constitutional and ethical concerns. The Fourteenth Amendment states that all those born within the United States borders are citizens. Specifically, the amendment writes, “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 is called birthright citizenship. As of January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump attempted to issue an executive order that eliminates this concept of birthright citizenship for those who are born in the United States and whose parents are not citizens. This would mean that these people would not be issued any documents that state citizenship in the United States and no documents would be issued or accepted by state or local governments. 

Next Steps

Currently, President Trump’s order has been denied by federal judges due to its unconstitutionality. Currently, the order has a temporary restraining order lasting 14 days. Judge John Coughenour stated, “I have been on the bench for over four decades. I can’t remember another case where the question presented was as clear.” But is it as clear as Coughenour thinks? One view is the Fourteenth Amendment states that a person is a citizen by birthright if they are subject to jurisdiction, and if someone is not a legal citizen, they are not under the jurisdiction of the United States. President Trump is claiming that if the parents are not citizens, their children should not be guaranteed citizenship just because they are born in the country. In the order, Trump states, “(1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States at the time of said person’s birth was lawful but temporary (such as, but not limited to, visiting the United States under the auspices of the Visa Waiver Program or visiting on a student, work, or tourist visa) and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.” So, President Trump’s order is not stating that birthright citizenship is no longer in effect in the United States because that would be a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, but the order is instead saying that if both parents are not United States citizens, their child will also not be a citizen. This legal fight raises a fundamental question of whether an executive order can alter the constitutionally guaranteed rights of American citizens.

Possible Harms & Risks

President Donald Trump’s proposed executive order has multiple risks attached. One of which is that if immigrants are denied legal rights and protection while the population is increasing, there would be an increase in poverty rates, homelessness, and economic inequality.  In New York City, the mean salary of immigrants is $49,613, $37,409 in Riverside County, CA, and $41,688 in Houston, TX to name a few. These salaries are extremely lower than the needed living standards. Another possible harm of the order could be an increase in immigration discrimination and social divides. People may become more hostile towards immigrants and feel as though immigrants do not have as much of a place in the United States as before. If the policy ends up being enforced after consideration from the Supreme Court, there would be economic complexities that would make it hard to determine who is a citizen, and if parents are illegal immigrants, they may not report births or get proper medical care when giving birth. If parents are concerned about the citizenship status of their child, they would be reluctant to receive medical care, and if there are complications during pregnancy, birth, or after birth, there could be dangers. Along with this, there would be an increase in anxiety among immigrants and a constant feeling of unsettledness surrounding their families and the rest of their lives. If it is found that there are immigrants who illegally entered the country and gave birth, there could be separations of families because of deportation.

Regarding the Constitution, this order could be seen as a possible change to the Constitution and may lead to an imbalance of federal powers in the executive branch. Furthermore, the United States v. Wong Kim Ark case stated that birthright citizenship was available to individuals born on U.S. soil regardless of the immigration or citizenship status of their parents. This Supreme Court case occurred in 1873 in San Francisco, California. The Supreme Court interpreted that the Constitution only referred to certain groups when discussing “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” meaning that only certain foreign diplomats, enemy occupiers, or Native Americans on tribal lands at that time, not children of immigration regardless of citizenship status. The risks of this executive order highlight the complexities of immigration policy, raising concerns about fairness, human rights, and the long-term stability of American society.

Possible Benefits

One possible benefit of President Trump’s executive order is that there could be a decrease in so-called “birth tourism.” Birth tourism is when individuals travel to the U.S. to give birth on purpose to secure citizenship for their children. Another possible benefit is that there could be a decrease in unauthorized entry to the United States. Removing birthright citizenship could discourage unauthorized immigration by eliminating one of the benefits of living in the U.S. Furthermore, birthright citizenship places a financial burden on healthcare, education, and welfare systems. Decreasing the amount of illegal immigrants in the U.S. would decrease the costs and spending of these programs, making the systems able to care more for United States citizens. Increasing lawful immigration standards would allow for more skill-based entry into the United States. These individuals would benefit the nation’s economy by allowing more merit-based jobs and skill-based careers and job opportunities that are enjoyed and allow for an increase in the mean income of immigrants. The United States economy could benefit from skilled workers becoming citizens because they could fill critical needs in the United States in certain professions, increasing both their living standards and the standards around the country.

Regarding international relations and norms, many countries including Europe and Asia do not grant automatic citizenship solely on birth within their borders, so international relations could be strained if certain countries want to focus on internal policies when deciding foreign relations. Societal issues could also be mitigated if people felt that gaining citizenship was too easy or unfair to others, which could benefit the treatment of immigrants around the country and the acceptance of the population. Lastly, even if the executive order is not passed, the discussion of birthright citizenship today would allow for clarity of the Fourteenth Amendment and immigration policies in the United States since the last time this was discussed on a federal level was in 1873. The ambiguity surrounding the Fourteenth Amendment has been debated for centuries and needs clarification for the advancement of the United States. In the long run, the proposed executive order could help streamline immigration policies, making the system more efficient and focused on merit-based immigration that benefits both immigrants and the U.S. economy.