Editor's note: Want to stay up to date with what's happening in the legislature? We invite you to register for our newsletter.
The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not reflect the opinions and beliefs of Microjuris or its affiliates.
By Lcda. Jessica L. Perez Salazar
On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order titled: “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” limiting automatic access to birthright citizenship for certain categories of people.
Specifically, the order provides that those born in the United States will not automatically be citizens if:
• The mother was unlawfully present in the US and the father was not a citizen or permanent resident. • The mother was in the US temporarily (for example, on a tourist, student or work visa) and the father was not a citizen or permanent resident.
The order indicates that these restrictions will apply to children born 30 days after the rule goes into effect, and prohibits federal agencies from issuing or accepting documents recognizing the citizenship of those who do not meet the new criteria.
The Fourteenth Amendment states that:
«Every person born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, is a citizen of the United States and of the state in which he or she resides. (…)»
However, this executive order reinterprets the citizenship clause, arguing that the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment was to correct the injustice of Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which denied citizenship to people of African descent, and did not grant universal citizenship to all people born in the United States. Under this new interpretation, children of immigrants with irregular status or temporary status would not be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and, therefore, would not be citizens by birth.
Historically, the Supreme Court has made key decisions regarding American citizenship, including:
In response to the executive order, 18 states, led by New York, Colorado and California, have sued the Trump administration, arguing that the president does not have the authority to reinterpret a constitutional amendment.
More than just an executive order, this measure appears designed to spark a legal battle in the Supreme Court over the strictest interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of \"jurisdiction.\" By polarizing the debate, the Trump administration seeks to strengthen its electoral base with a more restrictive immigration policy.
Meanwhile, thousands of immigrant families, in an irregular situation or with temporary status, face an uncertain future. Their children, born in the United States, could be trapped in a legal limbo that will affect their access to essential rights because citizenship not only grants a passport, but also fundamental rights such as education, health, work and social security.
The debate on citizenship by birth transcends the constitutional and the political; It is a human rights issue that will impact the social fabric, legal stability, and the fundamental principle of equality on which the United States was built. The final decision will not only determine who is recognized as a citizen, but also what values will prevail in the nation for generations to come.
Columns should be submitted to [email protected] and should be 600-800 words.