Who gets to be an American? Since the 14th Amendment to the Constitution was adopted in 1868, the answer to that question has been cemented in the American psyche: anyone born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen.
That is until Donald Trump issued an executive order on Jan. 20, 2025—the first day of his second term as President—that would make birthright citizenship conditional on the legal status of one’s parents, targeting many of the hundreds of thousands of children born each year to immigrants. The order was immediately challenged as unconstitutional and is expected to be held up and potentially blocked by the courts before it can go into effect.
[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]
But just how radical is the idea of limiting who can be a citizen? The U.S. is one of around 30 countries that follows the principle of generally unrestricted jus soli, meaning “right of soil.” This has allowed millions of people each year to automatically become American citizens irrespective of their parentage. Under Trump’s order, which is set to take effect on Feb. 19, at least one parent must be either a citizen or a lawful permanent resident for their U.S.-born child to become a citizen.
Taking into account other new orders to enforce more stringent immigration restrictions, at least one lawsuit against the Trump Administration contends that the affected children of the proposed birthright citizenship revision risk deportation or detention, could lose access to public benefits, and may even be rendered stateless.
What does it mean to not have birthright citizenship?
Across the world, birthright citizenship is not considered the norm. Canada and Mexico have unrestricted birthright citizenship, as do a majority of Latin American countries. But across Asia, Europe, and Africa, almost none do—at least without similar restrictions to what Trump is proposing.
Most countries with restricted birthright citizenship have conditions that broadly depend on either the legal residency status of at least one of the child’s parents, the residency of the child, or both. In Australia, for example, a child born there can become a citizen either if at least one parent is a citizen or permanent resident of Australia, or if the child resides in Australia for a decade following their birth.
Where countries don’t follow jus soli, they generally rely on jus sanguinis, meaning “right of blood.” Countries like Singapore and China require at least one parent to be a citizen in order for their child to become one. Whether or not the child is born in the country doesn’t matter—citizenship still follows their parents’ nationality. The U.S., like many other countries that follow jus soli, also applies jus sanguinis to children born to an American parent overseas.
If the practice of birthright citizenship appears geographically skewed—it’s much more common in the Western Hemisphere—sociologist John Skrenty told Politifact that might be because for many countries it was a tool of colonialism, used to quickly outnumber native populations. In the U.S., the 14th Amendment was adopted to address the legal status of freed slaves.
Have other countries changed their birthright citizenship laws before?
In recent years, several countries—including Pakistan, the Dominican Republic, and Ireland—have revised their citizenship laws to restrict or revoke birthright citizenship.
An Islamabad High Court heard the 2022 petition of a Pakistani-born Afghan who had not been granted citizenship despite Pakistan’s birthright citizenship. The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, but in November 2024, Pakistan introduced restrictions that would mean a person born in Pakistan, to be a citizen, had to either have a parent who was a citizen or permanent resident, or reside in Pakistan for a decade after their birth. The change stands to impact many more Afghan refugees who may lack the documentation needed to stay in Pakistan.
One of the most severe changes occurred in the Dominican Republic, where the government abolished birthright citizenship in 2013, ruling that anyone born after 1929 who does not have at least one parent of Dominican blood would be considered to be in the country illegally or “in transit.” The restriction denationalized more than 200,000 children of immigrants, many of whom were ethnically Haitian, according to Reuters.
And in 2004, Ireland became the last country in Europe to end unrestricted birthright citizenship when 79% of voters in a referendum chose to amend their constitution to require at least one parent be an Irish or British citizen, permanent resident, or legal temporary resident (excluding students and asylum seekers). The change was brought about after a much-publicized “immigration loophole” was discovered when two Chinese nationals living in the U.K. traveled to Belfast to give birth, which (due to Ireland’s unique relationship with both the U.K. and the E.U.) gave them so-called “backdoor” access to permanent residence in the U.K. as parents of a dependent E.U. citizen.
In 2018, around when Trump earlier discussed ending birthright citizenship in the U.S., a proposed law to restore birthright citizenship in Ireland gained ground after a high-profile case of a nine-year-old Ireland-born boy who faced deportation along with his Chinese mother. A survey at the time found 71% of Irish respondents wanted to bring birthright citizenship back. However, while the boy was ultimately granted a reprieve from the government, the bill to restore birthright citizenship failed, though the Irish Labour Party continues to advocate for such a change.
—Chad de Guzman contributed reporting.