The Citizenship Act would amend federal immigration law by defining unauthorized entrants and people coming to the United States for birth tourism as “invaders,” excluding their U.S.-born children from automatic citizenship.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
WASHINGTON — Sen. Jim Banks, R-Ind., is introducing legislation that would deny automatic birthright citizenship to children born in the United States whose parents entered the country illegally or came for the purpose of birth tourism.
The Citizenship Act, scheduled to be introduced Monday afternoon, would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act by classifying unauthorized entrants and people engaging in birth tourism as “invaders” under federal law.
Children born in the United States to parents covered by that definition would not automatically receive American citizenship under the legislation.
Banks’ proposal follows a Supreme Court ruling that struck down President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship. The court ruled that children born in the United States to illegal immigrants and temporary visa holders remain citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion and was joined by Justice Amy Coney Barrett and the court’s liberal justices. Justice Brett Kavanaugh issued a concurrence based on federal statutory law.
Banks’ bill seeks to respond directly to that ruling by changing the federal statute underlying the dispute rather than pursuing an immediate constitutional amendment.
Supporters of the measure argue that the Fourteenth Amendment’s phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” was not intended to guarantee automatic citizenship to children whose parents entered the country unlawfully or traveled to the United States specifically to secure citizenship for a newborn.
According to Fox News, the legislative strategy draws from Kavanaugh’s concurrence.
Kavanaugh concluded that Trump’s executive order conflicted with the existing federal statute but noted that Congress retains the authority to amend that law and establish clearer exceptions.
The Citizenship Act attempts to use that opening by revising the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The bill would declare that “any person who enters the United States without authorization or for the purpose of engaging in birth tourism is considered an invader.”
Children of people meeting that statutory definition would be excluded from birthright citizenship.
The legislation would also codify provisions of Trump’s 2025 executive order that used the term “invaders” in addressing illegal immigration.
Banks’ use of that language is connected to Trump’s declaration describing illegal immigration across the southern border as an “invasion”.
“The Citizenship Act would declare that children of statutory ‘invaders’ are not entitled to birthright citizenship under the law and codify a 2025 executive order that cites the term,” Fox News reported.
The bill’s summary states that “any person who enters the United States without authorization or for the purpose of engaging in birth tourism is considered an invader…” and amends federal immigration law to exclude the children of such individuals.
The proposal would not directly alter the Fourteenth Amendment or seek to overturn the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Instead, it would codify Trump’s declaration of an invasion and revise federal law to create an exception for children of illegal immigrants under legal precedents cited by the court’s majority.
Banks’ legislation and its legal rationale were also highlighted in a social media post.
House Speaker Mike Johnson has said congressional Republicans will continue pursuing restrictions on birthright citizenship following the Supreme Court decision.
Johnson told “Fox News Sunday” that House Republicans were “looking at all angles” to address birth tourism and what conservatives characterize as abuses of automatic citizenship.
The speaker said birth tourism “makes a mockery of our constitutional order, threatens our national security, and devalues citizenship.”
Johnson said Republicans were considering legislative options as well as a possible constitutional amendment.
The Trump administration has also continued pursuing criminal cases involving alleged birth tourism operations after the Supreme Court ruling.
Those investigations and prosecutions have included allegations involving visa fraud, identity theft, money laundering and wire fraud.
Banks’ proposal would shift the dispute back to Congress by asking lawmakers to define which people are covered by federal birthright citizenship law.
Its passage would likely produce another major legal challenge over the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress’ authority to define citizenship and whether unauthorized migration can be treated as an invasion for citizenship purposes.
Original article
Comments