President Donald Trump has reignited the debate over birthright citizenship in the United States by seeking to deny citizenship to children of migrants who are either in the country illegally or on temporary visas. This move challenges the long-standing 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, which has upheld the principle that anyone born on US soil is automatically a citizen for nearly 160 years. The proposal has stirred a legal and political discourse, as critics argue that an executive order cannot unilaterally overturn constitutional rights.
In the United States, birthright citizenship, also known as jus soli, is a significant aspect of national identity. The US is one of approximately 30 countries that grant automatic citizenship to anyone born within their borders. However, this practice is not universally followed. Many nations, particularly in Asia, Europe, and parts of Africa, adhere to the jus sanguinis principle, where children inherit their nationality from their parents rather than their place of birth.
"For many, birthright citizenship, based on being born in the territory, made for their state-building goals. For some, it encouraged immigration from Europe; for others, it ensured that indigenous populations and former slaves, and their children, would be included as full members, and not left stateless. It was a particular strategy for a particular time, and that time may have passed," remarked Saikrishna Prakash.
The global landscape reflects a variety of approaches to citizenship. Notably, Ireland was the last country in Europe to allow unrestricted jus soli before changing its policy. India, too, once granted automatic citizenship to anyone born on its soil but later revised its stance. Similarly, the Dominican Republic enacted a law in 2014 to grant citizenship to Dominican-born children of immigrants, notably affecting those of Haitian descent.
In recent years, several countries have tightened or revoked birthright citizenship due to concerns over immigration and national identity. The Dominican Republic's policy change was retroactive to 1929, resulting in stripping tens of thousands of Haitian descent of their Dominican nationality. Such actions highlight the complex interplay between national policies and global migration trends.
"We are now in an era of mass migration and easy transportation, even across oceans. Now, individuals also can be strategic about citizenship. That's why we are seeing this debate in the US now," stated John Skrentny.
Legal experts and scholars generally agree that President Trump cannot end birthright citizenship through an executive order alone. Two federal judges have sided with plaintiffs in lawsuits challenging Trump's order, indicating that the US Supreme Court would ultimately decide its fate. The 14th Amendment was originally adopted to address the legal status of freed slaves, embedding a fundamental right that many contend cannot be altered without constitutional amendment.
"This is not something he can decide on his own," emphasized Saikrishna Prakash.
The US has witnessed a trend of tightening its birthright laws amidst concerns over immigration and what is known as "birth tourism," where individuals travel to the US to give birth and secure citizenship for their children. This ongoing debate reflects broader international discussions about citizenship laws and national identity.
"They had to be strategic about whom to include and whom to exclude, and how to make the nation-state governable," noted Saikrishna Prakash.
Leave a Reply