Trump’s House GOP allies push birthright citizenship bill after progressive fury at presidential order
House Republicans are rallying behind President Donald Trump’s executive order to limit birthright citizenship, which is expected to face legal challenges. House Science and Technology Committee Chairman Brian Babin, R-Texas, is spearheading a new bill on the issue with the support of more than 20 GOP lawmakers. Babin emphasized the need to address both illegal immigration and “birth tourism,” where foreigners come to the U.S. solely to have children.
The proposed bill aims to close loopholes in the current birthright citizenship system and deter illegal immigration. Babin stressed that the goal is not to oppose immigration, citing his own family’s immigration history. He highlighted the importance of upholding the law and preventing the misuse of birthright citizenship privileges.
The controversy surrounding Trump’s executive order has sparked criticism from progressive groups like the ACLU, who have deemed it unconstitutional and contrary to American values. Babin welcomed the expected legal challenges, expressing a desire for the U.S. Supreme Court to provide a definitive ruling on the issue.
Similar to Trump’s order, Babin’s bill would restrict birthright citizenship to babies born to at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen, lawful permanent resident, or a lawful non-citizen serving in the U.S. military. Children born to illegal immigrants or parents on temporary visas would be excluded from automatic citizenship.
The debate centers on the interpretation of the Constitution’s citizenship clause, which grants citizenship to individuals born on U.S. soil. While the longstanding practice of birthright citizenship stems from a 1898 Supreme Court decision, critics point to other countries like France and the United Kingdom where citizenship is contingent upon parental status.
Trump remains resolute in his decision to end birthright citizenship, dismissing concerns of legal challenges. Babin’s bill is poised to provide a legal framework for Trump’s order, potentially bolstering its standing in court. The legislation is not anticipated to be introduced as a constitutional amendment but rather as a clarification of the 14th Amendment’s language and historical interpretation.
As the debate unfolds, the White House’s stance on Babin’s bill remains unclear. The ongoing conversation underscores the complexities of immigration policy and the need for bipartisan cooperation in addressing contentious issues.
