Trump has vowed to end birthright citizenship. Can he do it?

BBC - Mar 14th, 2025

In a significant move, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to end birthright citizenship for most people born on US soil, sparking widespread legal challenges. This action targets children of individuals in the US illegally or on temporary visas. However, the order has been blocked by lower courts, citing the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, which guarantees citizenship to anyone born in the US. Trump's administration argues for a narrower interpretation of this amendment, but many legal experts assert that such a change requires a constitutional amendment rather than an executive order.

The implications of this policy shift are profound, affecting both current and future generations. If successful, it could lead to a significant increase in the number of unauthorized immigrants, as birthright citizenship has been a critical aspect of US immigration policy since the Civil War era. The issue is now poised for a Supreme Court showdown, where the conservative-dominated bench will play a pivotal role in the outcome. The debate touches on broader themes of immigration, citizenship rights, and the balance of constitutional powers, with potential ramifications for millions of people and the future of US immigration policy.

Donald Trump Birthright Citizenship 14th Amendment Immigration Policy Us Supreme Court Executive Order Legal Challenges

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.8

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a comprehensive overview of the contentious issue of birthright citizenship and President Trump's executive order aimed at ending it. It effectively uses historical context and expert opinions to support its claims, contributing to its accuracy and engagement. However, the article could benefit from more explicit sourcing and transparency, particularly in terms of attributing data and expert opinions. While it presents a balanced view by including multiple perspectives, it could further enhance balance by incorporating more voices from those directly affected by the policy. Overall, the article is timely, relevant, and has the potential to influence public opinion and policy discussions, though it could improve in areas of source quality and transparency to enhance its reliability and depth.

Accuracy

The article accurately describes Trump's executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship and the legal challenges it faces. It correctly cites the 14th Amendment as the constitutional basis for birthright citizenship and references historical Supreme Court cases like *United States v. Wong Kim Ark*. However, the article could improve by providing more precise details about the executive order's content and the specific legal arguments used in court challenges. The mention of the Migration Policy Institute's findings and Pew Research data supports the article's claims about potential demographic impacts, adding to its factual accuracy.

Balance

The story presents multiple perspectives on the issue of birthright citizenship, including those of immigration hardliners and supporters of the policy. It quotes legal experts and scholars, providing a balanced view of the constitutional debate. However, the article could enhance balance by including more voices from those directly affected by the policy, such as immigrant families, to provide a fuller picture of the human impact. Additionally, while it mentions Trump's stance, it could also explore more deeply the perspectives of other political figures or parties.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and uses clear, accessible language to explain complex legal and constitutional issues. It maintains a neutral tone and logically presents information, making it easy for readers to follow. The historical context and legal precedents are explained in a straightforward manner, aiding comprehension. However, the article could improve clarity by providing more detailed explanations of legal terms and processes for readers unfamiliar with the subject.

Source quality

The article references credible sources, such as legal scholars and historical court cases, to support its claims. However, it lacks explicit attribution to specific reports or studies, which could strengthen its reliability. The inclusion of expert opinions, like those of Saikrishna Prakash, adds authority, but the article would benefit from citing more diverse sources, including direct statements from government officials or court documents, to enhance credibility.

Transparency

The article provides a clear overview of the topic but lacks transparency in terms of sourcing and methodology. It does not disclose how information was gathered or the potential biases of quoted experts. Greater transparency could be achieved by explicitly stating the sources of specific data, such as the Migration Policy Institute's findings, and clarifying any affiliations or potential conflicts of interest of the experts cited.