Get a free copy of Parental Rights & Education when you subscribe to our newsletter!
President Trump’s effort to end automatic U.S. citizenship for children born to illegal immigrants sets up a showdown between progressive globalism and common-sense constitutionalism.
What does it mean to be an American? Who gets to be an American citizen? These are fundamental questions that America — and every serious nation — must be able to answer coherently if it wishes to endure the test of time and withstand the pressures of deracinated globalism presently bearing down on Western civilization.
While they are crucially important questions for our moment, they definitely don’t have simple or agreed-upon answers in America — for now.
In one of his best and most controversial executive actions yet, President Trump forced the debate about the meaning and privilege of American citizenship to the front burner of our already heated political environment.
As part of his tsunami of “Day One” activity, President Trump signed the “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship Executive Order,” ending the practice of “birthright citizenship” under the Fourteenth Amendment in America.
The language in the executive order is equal parts instructive and powerfully plain. It begins by stating, “The privilege of United States citizenship is a priceless and profound gift.”
Amen to that. American citizenship is a privilege that should be reserved, first and foremost, for the children of Americans. Beyond that, it can be offered, with great prudence and in accordance with the interests of Americans, to a limited and reasonable number of immigrants who come here legally and commit to a complete naturalization process. America is not and should not become, as President Theodore Roosevelt once warned, a “polyglot boarding house” for the world.
Next, it explains the original purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment when drafted and adopted.
“The Fourteenth Amendment states: ‘All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.’ That provision rightly repudiated the Supreme Court of the United States’s shameful decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), which misinterpreted the Constitution as permanently excluding people of African descent from eligibility for United States citizenship solely based on their race.”
Trump is correct here: The historical, original purpose of this language in the Fourteenth Amendment was for the purpose of rectifying a specific wrong: Excluding the descendants of African slaves from holding citizenship in the United States. The original intent of the Amendment was to ensure citizenship for freed slaves post-Civil War, not to create automatic citizenship for anyone and everyone born within U.S. borders.
This leads right to the heart of the contested interpretation and application thereof. As the executive order explains:
“But the Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States. The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Consistent with this understanding, the Congress has further specified through legislation that “a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is a national and citizen of the United States at birth, 8 U.S.C. 1401, generally mirroring the Fourteenth Amendment’s text.”
Thus, the debate hinges on understanding what “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means and what it meant when it was drafted and adopted.
In constitutional scholar John Eastman’s excellent article defending the executive order’s legal reasoning, titled “Birthright Citizenship: Game On!,” he boils the argument in favor of ending birthright citizenship down to one simple sentence: “The 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause does not provide automatic citizenship for everyone born on U.S. soil, no matter the circumstances.”
And there you have it. It’s constitutional common sense. Eastman further explains that the “argument is straightforward. The text of the 14th Amendment contains two requirements for acquiring automatic citizenship by birth: one must be born in the United States and be subject to its jurisdiction…The proper understanding of the Citizenship Clause therefore turns on what the drafters of the amendment, and those who ratified it, meant by ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’”
So how does Trump’s action “end” birthright citizenship? It instructs all federal agencies to adopt the policy that no government department or agency will issue or accept documents recognizing U.S. citizenship for individuals born under specific conditions. These conditions include if the person’s mother was unlawfully in the U.S. at the time of birth and the father was not a U.S. citizen or permanent resident. Additionally, this applies if the mother’s presence was lawful but temporary and the father was not a U.S. citizen or permanent resident at the time of birth.
The bottom line is that, if enacted, this would stop the U.S. government from issuing social security numbers or passports to people born in the U.S. to illegal aliens or temporary visa-holders. In short, it stops people who are citizens of another country from simply having a child on American soil and that child “magically” becoming an American citizen by the mere location of their birth.
Why is this so important? Theo Wold, a former deputy assistant for domestic policy to President Trump who also served as assistant attorney general overseeing the Office of Legal Policy in the first Trump administration, rightly points out that
“The absurdity of birthright citizenship is no laughing matter…particularly when combined with American immigration law. In 2022, there were 1.2 million US citizens born to illegal alien parents. Because our immigration law privileges family unification — nearly 64% of Green Cards are issued based on chain migration — birthright citizenship has incentivized illegal aliens to give birth in the U.S. and use their citizen ‘anchor baby’ to secure lawful immigration status for other family members.”
Trump is prioritizing the privilege and value of American citizenship. Millions of people want to come to America, as evidenced by our current mass migration crisis. However, no other developed country in the Western world extends “birthright citizenship” in the same manner as the United States. Our overly generous policies devalue what it means to be an American.
Trump wants to change that — as he should.
Of course, the progressive globalists don’t want to let him. This order sparked immediate and widespread legal challenges: On January 21, 2025, 18 states, along with the District of Columbia and San Francisco, filed a lawsuit in federal court in Massachusetts to block the order. Another group of four states (Washington, Arizona, Illinois, and Oregon) filed a separate lawsuit in the Western District of Washington on the same day, challenging the order on similar constitutional grounds.
On January 23, 2025, a progressive U.S. District Judge in Seattle issued a temporary restraining order blocking the implementation of Trump’s executive order. During the hearing, Judge Coughenour described the order as “blatantly unconstitutional.”
Trump’s Department of Justice has since responded to the injunction, defending the executive order. Eastman proclaimed that the “DOJ’s Brief opposing the motion for preliminary injunction in the birthright citizenship case is powerful, and a very accurate assessment of the original public meaning of the Citizenship Clause. Let’s hope the judge in the case gives it the serious consideration it is due.”
As the case advances through the legal system, we will witness a showdown between common sense and progressive jurisprudence rooted in a globalist agenda.
Of course, children born to illegal aliens should not be automatically given the precious privilege of U.S. citizenship. Of course, interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment in a manner consistent with the intent of the original authors is not “unconstitutional.”
But, of course, we don’t live in an age overflowing with common sense or constitutional originalism. Thus, the fate of this reform remains to be seen.
What should Christians think about the Trump administration’s efforts to end birthright citizenship? I think they should support it — and here’s why.
President Trump’s initiative to end birthright citizenship aligns with several core Christian values. First, it upholds the sanctity of national sovereignty (Acts 17:26) and the rule of law (Romans 13:1). By ensuring that citizenship is not automatically granted to children of illegal aliens, our society can better maintain order, enact justice, and ensure fairness for American citizens, all principles supported by historic Christian ethics.
Furthermore, Christians support sound and responsible economic stewardship (Matthew 25:14-30) by the government; limited resources should be managed responsibly for the benefit of legal citizens, thereby preventing undue strain on social services that should be reserved for those who have contributed to the nation (2 Thessalonians 3:10).
Finally, Christians should remember that nothing about our faith and the teachings of Scripture supports the idea of a borderless, globalist, one-world government. Nations have an inherent right to police their boundaries and defend their citizens. Not only is that a right, but it is also a duty they have before God.
It’s good and just for the American government to defend and value American citizenship and to reserve it for those who are born to American parents or who come here legally. America might have some of the most productive farmland in the world, but it doesn’t have magic soil. Just because an illegal alien manages to cross our border doesn’t make them — or their children — an American.
Yes, Christians can and should support that because it’s common sense. Because our God is a God of order and wisdom, followers of Christ should embrace order, justice, wisdom, and common sense as well — including how we answer the question, “What does it mean to be an American citizen?”
If you like this article and other content that helps you apply a biblical worldview to today’s politics and culture, consider making a donation here.