The Supreme Court is once again Hear arguments about whether President Donald Trump He can Denial of citizenship For children born to parents who are in the United States illegally or temporarily.
Wednesday’s case stems from an executive order Trump signed on the first day of his second term ending what is known as birthright citizenship, which guarantees citizenship to nearly everyone born on American soil.
Although this concept has been part of American law for more than a century, it is relatively rare around the world.
Birthright citizenship is based on the legal principle of jus soli, or “jus soli.”
In the United States, this right was enshrined in the Constitution after the Civil War, in part to ensure that former slaves could obtain citizenship.
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.”
In the late nineteenth century, Birthright citizenship was legally expanded For children of immigrants.
Wong Kim Arc, who was born in the United States to Chinese parents, filed a lawsuit after traveling abroad and being denied re-entry into the United States. The Supreme Court eventually ruled that the amendment grants citizenship to every person born in the United States, regardless of the legal status of their parents.
Today there are only a few birthright exceptions, such as children born in the United States to foreign diplomats.
Only about thirty countries, almost all of them in the Americas, guarantee citizenship for children born on their territory.
Most countries follow the principle of jus sanguinis, whereby a child’s nationality depends on the nationality of his or her parents, regardless of where he or she was born.
For example, none of the 27 member states of the European Union grant automatic and unconditional citizenship to children born on its territory to foreign nationals. The situation is similar in most parts of Asia, the Middle East and Africa.
Some countries use a combination of principles, such as paternity, residence and ethnicity, to determine a child’s nationality.
For example, Australia allowed birthright citizenship until 1986. But starting in August of that year, children born there could no longer become citizens unless at least one parent was an Australian citizen or permanent resident.
Things have turned the other way in Germany, which changed its citizenship laws in 2024.
Until then, citizenship by birth required that at least one parent be German. From 2024, children born in Germany to non-German parents will automatically be granted German citizenship if one parent has lived legally in the country for more than five years with unlimited residence status.
The government wrote at the time that citizenship laws were liberalized because “studies have shown that the better the educational prospects for children and adolescents with an immigrant background, the faster they obtain German citizenship.”
Supporters of birthright restrictions in the United States focus on a handful of words in the constitutional amendment: “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
They say the phrase means the United States can deprive children born to women who are in the country illegally of citizenship.
A number of judges have ruled against the administration and the matter has been repeatedly suspended minimum Courts.
The case arose Wednesday in New Hampshirewith a U.S. District Judge ruling that the order “likely violates” both the Constitution and federal law.
___
AP reporter Kirsten Grieshaber contributed to this story from Berlin.