US birthright citizenship explained: Who is impacted & why Trump opposes it

US Supreme Court weighs Trump's move to end birthright citizenship, raising concerns for Indian families on H-1B and F-1 visas

The US Supreme Court on Wednesday heard arguments on President Donald Trump’s bid to scale back birthright citizenship, a constitutional guarantee for those born in the United States.

 

Trump attended the arguments for about 90 minutes, becoming the first sitting president to do so.

 

In a post on Truth Social, his first public reaction after the hearing, Trump wrote, “We are the only Country in the world stupid enough to allow ‘Birthright’ Citizenship!”.

 

Earlier on March 30, Trump attacked the 14th Amendment on Truth Social, claiming birthright citizenship was originally intended only for the “babies of slaves”, not foreign nationals. Ahead of the hearing on his executive order to end the practice, he called the current system “ridiculous” and criticised the courts as “stupid” for allowing “birth tourism”. He argued that children of undocumented immigrants are not truly “subject to US jurisdiction”.

   

Ending birthright citizenship would directly affect Indian citizens, particularly H-1B and F-1 visa holders whose children were born in the United States.

 

“They would no longer automatically receive citizenship and could immediately face deportation and lose the ability to eventually sponsor their parents for green cards, creating long-term legal and residency uncertainty for thousands of Indian families,” said Sam Andrabi, Legal Associate at Jotwani Associates, speaking to Business Standard.

 

What the justices said during the hearing

 

In response to the administration’s argument that “we’re in a new world” since the 14th Amendment was passed, Chief Justice John Roberts replied, “It’s the same Constitution.”

 

Conservative justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch also raised questions around the central arguments put forward by the administration.

 

During the hearing, both conservative and liberal members of the court expressed concerns over whether the executive order aligns with the Constitution and existing federal law.

 

What’s the legal proposition?

 

According to Andrabi, the US Constitution addresses birthright citizenship through the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868.

 

The first sentence of Section 1, known as the Citizenship Clause, reads: “All persons born or naturalised in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

 

In effect, anyone born on US soil is treated as a citizen under current interpretation.

 

What is at stake?

 

The court’s decision, expected by the end of June, could affect millions of people, including US citizens. The arguments also come as the White House is still reacting to the court’s February decision to strike down Trump’s global tariffs.

 

The executive order seeks to deny automatic citizenship to children born in the United States to parents who are either in the country illegally or temporarily. It forms part of a wider immigration crackdown pursued by the Trump administration.

 

More than 0.25 million babies born in the US each year could be affected, according to research by the Migration Policy Institute and Pennsylvania State University’s Population Research Institute.

 

While Trump has focused largely on illegal immigration in his public messaging, the proposed restrictions would also apply to those legally in the country, including students and green card applicants.

 

Several justices questioned the legal basis of the move and how it would work in practice.

 

“Is this happening in the delivery room?” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson asked, referring to the practical challenges of determining citizenship at birth.

 

“However, even when President Trump sounds desperate to repeal the Constitution of the United States, the process for amending the US Constitution is outlined in Article V of the US Constitution itself. It was intentionally designed to be difficult to ensure that only changes with a broad national consensus are adopted. An amendment of the Constitution can take place when both the House of Representatives and the Senate vote positively to amend the Constitution. And then even the Supreme Court of the United States has the power to oversee and reject any amendment,” Andrabi said.