The Battle Over Birthright Citizenship

Photo via Capital Public Radio

***

With the return of President Donald J. Trump to the White House in 2025, politics has continued to be an incredibly divisive and controversial subject among individuals. Tension and fear have run high due to many of his policies. On his first day in office, Trump vowed to sign 100 executive orders and has since signed 54 after less than a month as president. Unsurprisingly, many of these executive orders are already considered controversial and unreasonable, such as placing tariffs on Mexico, Canada, and China, and withdrawing from the World Health Organization. However, the most absurd executive order President Trump has signed, by far, is one that would ultimately end birthright citizenship for children of undocumented parents, an order that outright defies the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.

Luckily, it would take much more than an executive order signed by the President to change the constitution. It is not within the President’s powers to amend the constitution, making this executive order invalid. Time and time again, President Trump has made the issue of immigration an integral component of his campaign, long promising mass deportations and ending birthright citizenship. While some immigration issues he promised to resolve are easily addressed through executive orders, ending birthright citizenship is not one of them. Considering this, birthright citizenship will be a long legal battle, leaving the final say regarding the legitimacy to the courts to decide. 

Despite this, the Trump administration’s primary argumentative basis for proceeding with the intention to end birthright citizenship is a clause in the 14th amendment which states, “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”, claiming that this line here gives basis to exclude children of non-citizens who are in the US unlawfully. What many do not realize, however, is that in the hypothetical situation in which this executive order is approved by the courts, it would be overturning more than a century of precedent cases. Citizenship for Native Americans was granted in 1924 while individuals of Mexican and Spanish descent were granted citizenship in 1848 under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the US-Mexican War. The SCOTUS decision of U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) established birthright citizenship in the US for anyone born on US territory, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. Considering the Constitution was written long before any of these events, these underrepresented minorities had to fight for their birthright as Americans. Moreover, these precedents are on the line and at risk of being overturned if President Trump’s executive order were to be seriously considered by the courts. 

Fortunately, legal scholars think doing this would be almost impossible due to the controversy of the matter, making it difficult for Congress and the courts to agree to this. Several federal judges have already blocked and rebuked the executive order, further proving the challenges that Trump faces in pursuing this issue. This past week both a Seattle and a Maryland federal judge have issued injunctions to Trump’s executive orders. Several lawsuits are now challenging Trump’s order, many of which were filed by the attorney generals of Washington, Arizona, Illinois, and Oregon, as well as Maryland. 

While President Trump’s policies have undoubtedly created division and fear, the road to amending the Constitution is far more complex than any executive order can address. Despite his efforts to justify this move, key court rulings and the protections of citizenship stand firmly in opposition. Legal experts and federal judges have already demonstrated the difficulty in pushing forward such sweeping changes. Though this issue is a controversial one, it serves as a reminder of the limits to presidential power, and how a single person never has complete control in government, despite what President Trump may believe.

***

This article was edited by Allison Anwalimhobor and Kate Stover.