US President Donald Trump has defended his January 2025 decision to end automatic birthright citizenship for children born in the United States to parents lacking citizenship or permanent residency, arguing that the law was originally intended only for the children of enslaved people—not for wealthy immigrants seeking to settle in America.
Speaking in a recent interview with Politico, Trump said the constitutional provision granting birthright citizenship dates back to the aftermath of the American Civil War and was meant to secure citizenship for “the babies of slaves.” He expressed concern that wealthy immigrants misuse the clause to obtain U.S. citizenship for their entire families simply by giving birth on American soil. “That case is all about slaves … not for some rich person coming from another country … putting a foot in our country, and all of a sudden their whole family becomes … United States citizens,” he told Politico.
Trump called the original enactment of birthright citizenship “a good and noble” measure, but insisted its scope should never have extended beyond the children of formerly enslaved individuals. He warned that undoing his executive order would have devastating consequences, adding that the country cannot afford to provide citizenship to “tens of millions of people.”
In January 2025, on his first day back as President, Trump signed an executive order revoking the long-standing policy. The administration declared that any child born in the United States 30 days after January 20 of that year would no longer automatically qualify for citizenship under the new rule.
The revocation directly challenged the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1868, which states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States … are citizens of the United States.” That amendment was originally added to grant citizenship to formerly enslaved individuals and ensure equal rights under the law.
Legal challenges swiftly followed the order. Federal courts in several states blocked its implementation, ruling it unconstitutional. In June 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court stepped in, concluding that lower courts lacked the authority to issue broad nationwide injunctions — but has agreed to hear a direct appeal on the issue. A final decision on whether the order is consistent with the Constitution is expected by mid-2026.
Critics argue Trump’s reinterpretation undermines a constitutional guarantee that has defined American citizenship for over 150 years, potentially leaving children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents stateless or requiring complicated legal status. Supporters, however, frame the move as a necessary fix to curb what they describe as “birth tourism” and unchecked immigration, defending the amendment’s original post-Civil War purpose as Trump described it.
