Should Babies Born to Illegal Aliens Be Granted U.S. Citizenship?

The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday is birthright citizenship. As a reminder, President Donald Trump, just hours after taking his oath of office on January 20, 2025, signed 26 executive orders. One of those orders was written to end birthright citizenship as it is currently known. That order prompted immediate worldwide backlash because it was meant to change what is considered a right enshrined in the Constitution. The Trump administration obviously believes it is not a constitutional right for a foreigner to enter the United, have a baby, and claim U.S. citizenship for such a baby. I agree with Trump.

The first lawsuit was filed less than two hours after Trump signed the order. According to an article written by Natalia Galicza and published in the Deseret News, “attorneys general from 22 states sued to block it.” 

Opponents decry the president’s move as inhumane and in direct violation of the 14^th Amendment, which has legally granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. since 1868. Proponents say ending so-called birthright citizenship would decrease illegal immigration rates, limit “birth tourism” and protect the value of American citizenship.

Courts have interpreted birthright citizenship in the constitution to mean that those born in the United States are citizens, regardless of whether their parents are citizens. Trump’s executive order would effectively change that to mean a baby born stateside would not have American citizenship if the father is not a citizen or legal permanent resident (also known as a green card holder) and the mother is undocumented or has legal temporary status.

While it’s not the first time the principle of birthright citizenship has faced scrutiny, the current legal battle marks the most ambitious attempt yet to redefine it. “There’s been some chatter at various times about whether birthright citizenship makes sense. But no president has sought to restrict…..

At least six federal courts thus far have sided with opponents to Trump’s order….

For both sides, the stakes go beyond the ongoing immigration debate and contest to build up or break down obstacles to citizenship….

The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments weeks or even months ago, and their decision on the case should come down before the end of June. According to Galicza:

… it would affect anyone born on or after 1 February 2025. A key factor that differentiates this moment from past challenges is that it isn’t just targeting immigrants living in the country illegally. The executive order would also deny citizenship to some children of “temporary legal residents.” That includes parents with student, work, family, tourist and humanitarian visas. People who have opted for legal pathways…

State-issued birth certificates would no longer count as final proof of citizenship. Instead, citizenship could only be proven by verifying the parents’ immigration status at the time of the child’s birth. With about 10,000 children born nationwide every day – or more than 3.6 million – the shift would require hospital and state workers to take on screening new parents about their citizenship status, requiring proof of immigration status or their own birth certificates and naturalization documents – would cost immigrant parents $600 per child in government fees and anywhere from $600 to $1,000 in associated legal fees….

Supporters of the executive order contend that children of immigrants living in the country illegally cannot express allegiance or take an oath to renounce foreign ties, and that heritage tied to other countries implies they owe allegiance abroad. In other words, they would not be subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States….