US May Limit Birthright Citizenship: A Look at Global Practices

On April 1, 2025, the United States Supreme Court is set to hear a pivotal case regarding the legality of a contentious plan introduced by former President Donald Trump, which seeks to restrict birthright citizenship. This initiative, encapsulated in an executive order that Trump signed on January 20, 2025, the first day of his second term, has sparked considerable legal challenges and poses a threat to the citizenship status of numerous immigrant families living in the United States.

For nearly 160 years, the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution has guaranteed automatic citizenship to anyone born on US soil. However, Trump's executive order proposes a reinterpretation of this guarantee, denying citizenship to children born to immigrants who are in the country illegally or on temporary visas. This has raised alarms among human rights advocates and immigration lawyers, who believe that such changes could lead to dire consequences for many families.

Currently, Trump's order has not taken effect, as lower courts have issued rulings blocking its implementation. However, if the Supreme Court rules in favor of Trump, the new regulations could come into force 30 days after the verdict is delivered. This situation has caused anxiety among immigrants who may find themselves in a state of legal uncertainty.

In the context of international law, birthright citizenship, or jus soli (right of the soil), is not a universally accepted practice worldwide. The United States is one of approximately 30 countries that grant automatic citizenship to anyone born on their territory. Other countries adhering to this principle include Brazil, Argentina, Chile, and Mexico. In contrast, many countries in Asia, Europe, and parts of Africa follow the principle of jus sanguinis (right of blood), where children inherit citizenship from their parents regardless of their birthplace.

For instance, countries such as Indonesia, the Russian Federation, Japan, China, Thailand, Vietnam, Nigeria, and most nations in the Middle East and North Africa employ a jus sanguinis system. India also adheres to this principle, but Pakistan stands out in Asia by providing automatic citizenship to anyone born on its territory. Other nations adopt a mixed approach, granting citizenship to children of permanent residents.

Countries that utilize a mixed approach include the United Kingdom, Portugal, Spain, France, Germany, Australia, and South Africa. John Skrentny, a sociology professor at the University of California, San Diego, notes that while birthright citizenship is prevalent in America, "each nation-state has had its unique path to it." He emphasizes that the history of this issue is complex, as the 14th Amendment in the US was enacted to address the legal status of freed slaves.

Professor Skrentny also points out that nearly all countries with birthright citizenship share a desire to "build a nation-state from a former colony." "They had to strategically approach whom to include and whom to exclude, and how to make the nation-state governable," he explains. For many nations, birthright citizenship has become an essential tool in nation-building.

In recent years, several countries have revised their citizenship laws, tightening or abolishing automatic birthright citizenship due to concerns over immigration, national identity, and so-called "birth tourism," where individuals travel to a country to give birth. For example, India once granted automatic citizenship to anyone born on its territory, but over time, concerns about illegal immigration, particularly from Bangladesh, led to restrictions.

Since December 2004, a child born in India is a citizen only if both parents are Indian, or if one parent is a citizen and the other is not considered an illegal immigrant. Many African countries that previously adhered to jus soli under colonial legal systems have abandoned it after gaining independence. Today, most require at least one parent to be a citizen or permanent resident of the country.

Citizenship is even more restricted in most Asian countries, where it is predominantly determined by descent, as seen in countries like China, Malaysia, and Singapore. Europe has also experienced significant changes. Ireland was the last country in the region to allow unrestricted jus soli but revoked this policy following a referendum in June 2004, where 79% of voters supported a constitutional amendment requiring at least one parent to be a citizen, permanent resident, or legal temporary resident of the country.

One of the most significant changes occurred in the Dominican Republic, where a constitutional amendment in 2010 altered citizenship rights, excluding children of illegal migrants. A Supreme Court ruling in 2013 retroactively enforced this law from 1929, stripping tens of thousands of individuals, primarily of Haitian descent, of their Dominican citizenship. This sparked international outcry and condemnation from human rights organizations.

In response to public protests, the Dominican Republic enacted a law in 2014 that established a citizenship provision for children of immigrants born in the country, prioritizing those of Haitian descent. Skrentny views these changes as part of a global trend, noting that "we are now living in an era of mass migration and easy travel, even across oceans." This has led people to strategically consider citizenship, which in turn explains the current debates in the United States.