Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
This bill amends 8 U.S.C. 1401 (section 301 of the INA) to define which persons born in the United States are "subject to the jurisdiction" for birthright citizenship. It says a person born in the U.S. is subject to jurisdiction if one parent is a U.S. citizen or national, a lawful permanent resident residing in the U.S., or a person with lawful immigration status performing active U.S. military service.
Progressives emphasize constitutional and child-welfare harms
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory amendment that clearly states its purpose and specifies textual language to redefine who is 'subject to the jurisdiction' for birthright citizenship, but it provides minimal implementation guidance, cost acknowledgment, edge-case handling, or accountability mechanisms.
This bill amends 8 U.S.C. 1401 (section 301 of the INA) to define which persons born in the United States are "subject to the jurisdiction" for birthright citizenship.
It says a person born in the U.S. is subject to jurisdiction if one parent is a U.S. citizen or national, a lawful permanent resident residing in the U.S., or a person with lawful immigration status performing active U.S. military service.
The bill acknowledges the 14th Amendment but codifies those parental categories and does not change citizenship for persons born before enactment.
Clear, focused statutory change but extremely controversial and likely to provoke legal challenges; low procedural and bipartisan support implied by content.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory amendment that clearly states its purpose and specifies textual language to redefine who is 'subject to the jurisdiction' for birthright citizenship, but it provides minimal implementation guidance, cost acknowledgment, edge-case handling, or accountability mechanisms.
Progressives emphasize constitutional and child-welfare harms
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize constitutional and child-welfare harms
Likely views the bill as an effort to curtail longstanding birthright citizenship practice and to exclude children of unauthorized or temporary-status parents.
Concerns will focus on constitutional conflict, harms to children, and effects on immigrant communities.
Would see the bill as a targeted statutory clarification with significant legal and implementation questions.
Balances desire for clear rules against concerns about constitutional challenges, child welfare, and administrative complexity.
Likely views the bill favorably as closing a perceived loophole used for birth tourism and as aligning statutory language with immigration control goals.
Sees the bill as a lawful, narrowly focused fix.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Clear, focused statutory change but extremely controversial and likely to provoke legal challenges; low procedural and bipartisan support implied by content.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize constitutional and child-welfare harms
Clear, focused statutory change but extremely controversial and likely to provoke legal challenges; low procedural and bipartisan support i…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory amendment that clearly states its purpose and specifies textual language to redefine who is 'subject to the jurisdiction' for birthrigh…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.