From February 19, 2025, these children may no longer be recognized as U.S. citizens, even if they are born on U.S. soil.

Sexy In Sari · Jan 20, 2025 11:02 PM

Even if a child born in the United States obtains a U.S. birth certificate, the State Department may require proof of lawful permanent residency or U.S. citizenship from at least one parent when applying for the child’s U.S. passport. Specifically, the State Department may mandate that one parent present a valid Permanent Resident Card (Green Card) or U.S. passport as part of the application process. If neither parent can provide such documentation—for instance, if both parents hold temporary nonimmigrant visas (e.g., F-1/F-2 status)—the State Department may deny the passport application, regardless of the child’s U.S. birth certificate. This could result in the child being unable to obtain a U.S. passport, thereby limiting their ability to prove U.S. citizenship and access associated rights and benefits.

Sexy In Sari · Jan 20, 2025 11:14 PM

The U.S. Constitution guarantees birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment, which states that anyone born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction is a U.S. citizen. A birth certificate serves as proof of this constitutional right.  However, the State Department’s passport application process is an administrative procedure, not explicitly outlined in the Constitution. While the Constitution ensures citizenship, the State Department’s requirements for issuing passports—such as demanding proof of a parent’s permanent residency or U.S. citizenship—are bureaucratic hurdles that can create barriers for children born to parents on temporary visas. 

Sexy In Sari · Jan 20, 2025 11:24 PM

SIS, I know you like it, but it’s not retroactive. First, it’s proactive—if you have U.S. citizenship, it won’t apply retroactively. Second, this is more of a stunt. It’s protected by the Constitution, making it difficult to change without amendments.

bhamnepali · Jan 20, 2025 11:47 PM

Ending birthright citizenship would require more than just a simple majority or support from Democrats. It would need approval from three-fourths of Congress and ratification by 38 out of 50 states. This is simply a political stunt aimed at energizing his base by making it look like he tried. Also, the “jurisdiction thereof” argument is not going to work. If it stands, it would mean that foreign nationals could act without consequences.

bhamnepali · Jan 20, 2025 11:58 PM

@bhamnepali:  I agree that documents need to be provided to establish birthright citizenship. However, what about other agencies like the State Department issuing passports? A passport isn’t a birthright citizenship document—it’s a travel document issued based on proof of citizenship. The process for obtaining a passport, especially for children, involves additional requirements, such as parental documentation, which goes beyond just proving birthright citizenship. Please note that under the current policy, if you want to get a passport for a child under 16, you have to submit a new application—you can’t simply renew an old U.S. passport. This process is separate from what’s outlined in the Constitution and is based on the rules and procedures set by the State Department. Now, the argument is that "new application" means going through the entire process again from scratch—not just updating or renewing an existing passport. It’s not a simple renewal; it’s starting fresh, which includes providing all required documentation, like the parent’s legal documents, all over again.

Sexy IN Sari · Jan 21, 2025 8:32 AM

Trump isn’t disqualifying the child; he’s disqualifying the parents. The issue centers on the parents’ legal status or documentation, such as proof of lawful permanent residency (e.g., a green card) or U.S. citizenship (e.g., a U.S. passport or certificate of naturalization). The child’s eligibility is contingent on the parents meeting these legal requirements, not on the child themselves.

Sexy IN Sari · Jan 21, 2025 8:35 AM

This is not retroactive. And it’s not finalized yet, I don’t understand this scare mongering. I see sadism here. People have enough struggles to live a normal life. Why add pain?

chicagoan · Jan 21, 2025 9:48 AM

It is just a fanfare to rile up his base like SIS. Even though it is proactive, I am sure it has no chances of holding up. Lawsuits have already been filed and will be enjoined before it even starts. MAGAts are getting caught up in this too.

bhamnepali · Jan 21, 2025 10:55 AM

It has to pass by House and Congress, long way to go. You will see many tricks as a street charmer. You entered happily and if you have to go back, go happily.

Logan · Jan 21, 2025 11:24 AM

Hey Sajha Folks, US Citizenship by Birth is protected by US Constitution and cannot be just changed by an executive order. The judicial system will block such executive order if it doesn't align with the US Constitution.

ujl · Jan 21, 2025 11:59 AM

The order has been blocked by a Reagan appointed judge, albeit temporarily. https://www.seattletimes.com/s...

bhamnepali · Jan 23, 2025 1:46 PM

खोक्रो सान्त्वना भए पनि दिउ होला कहिँ भबिस्यमा भरिलो हुन्छ कि ? आउछ र पाउछौ थप Extension -TPS

Logan · Jan 24, 2025 12:27 PM