Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
This bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to redefine the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" for purposes of birthright citizenship. Under the amendment, a person born in the United States is considered "subject to the jurisdiction" only if, at birth, at least one parent is a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident.
Progressives emphasize constitutional and civil-rights harms.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise substantive policy change that narrowly rewrites statutory definition to restrict automatic birthright nationality for future births, but it provides minimal implementation scaffolding.
This bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to redefine the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" for purposes of birthright citizenship.
Under the amendment, a person born in the United States is considered "subject to the jurisdiction" only if, at birth, at least one parent is a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident.
The change applies only to persons born after the date of enactment.
Substantial legal uncertainty, high controversy, and lack of compromise features make enactment unlikely despite concise drafting.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise substantive policy change that narrowly rewrites statutory definition to restrict automatic birthright nationality for future births, but it provides minimal implementation scaffolding.
Progressives emphasize constitutional and civil-rights harms.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize constitutional and civil-rights harms.
Likely strongly opposed.
Main concerns will be that the statute attempts to abridge the longstanding interpretation of the 14th Amendment and will harm children and families.
Foresees civil-rights, racialized enforcement consequences and possible statelessness for some children.
Mixed and cautious.
Sees the bill as addressing concerns about incentives but worries about constitutional validity and practical fallout.
Would prefer careful legal review, narrower targeting, or a constitutional amendment if the change is intended to be permanent.
Generally supportive.
Views the bill as a statutory fix to prevent automatic birthright citizenship for children of parents without citizenship or lawful permanent residency.
Sees it as advancing immigration control and reducing incentives for misuse of U.S. birthright.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Substantial legal uncertainty, high controversy, and lack of compromise features make enactment unlikely despite concise drafting.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize constitutional and civil-rights harms.
Substantial legal uncertainty, high controversy, and lack of compromise features make enactment unlikely despite concise drafting.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise substantive policy change that narrowly rewrites statutory definition to restrict automatic birthright nationality for future births, but it provides min…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.