The US government has expressed worries about “birth tourism,” particularly from China, and has called on the Supreme Court to limit automatic citizenship for children born on American soil. Solicitor General John Sauer, representing the Trump administration, highlighted that foreign nationals are increasingly coming to the US to have babies, leading to what he described as a significant industry. Reports have linked 1 to 1.5 million births to Chinese nationals, with hundreds of Chinese companies aiding in this travel.
Sauer argued that the current system sets the US apart from other modern nations and serves as an attraction for immigration. He noted that European countries typically base citizenship on parentage rather than birthplace, contrasting with the US approach. The debate before the court has taken on a geopolitical aspect, focusing on whether the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to almost all children born in the US.
During the proceedings, some justices questioned the relevance of international comparisons in interpreting US law. Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggested that while global practices might inform policy discussions, they might not directly apply to US legal interpretation. Opponents of the administration’s stance emphasized that the US Constitution reflects a distinct American perspective rooted in history, with the 14th Amendment aiming to establish a clear rule that birth in the US grants citizenship, with limited exceptions.
The discussion also delved into the potential broader impacts of altering this rule. Justice Samuel Alito raised concerns about the implications for families, especially those deeply connected to the country over time. Sauer contended that countries with stricter citizenship regulations do not face significant humanitarian crises, implying that the US could consider a similar approach. He highlighted the changing global landscape, noting the proximity of eight billion people to the US with just a plane ride.
Opponents cautioned that such reasoning could challenge established legal precedents. They referenced the Supreme Court’s 1898 ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, affirming that most US-born children are citizens regardless of their parents’ status. The 14th Amendment, passed in 1868, overturned the Dred Scott decision and set a national citizenship standard. For more than a hundred years, the US has adhered to a broad birthright citizenship principle. The court’s decision may determine whether this approach continues or moves closer to practices in other parts of the world.
