With Trump’s January 20, 2025, executive order to end birthright citizenship for children of non-citizens, the debate over the Citizenship Clause is finally back in the spotlight. The order rightly clarifies that citizenship doesn’t automatically apply to children born in the U.S. to illegal or temporary immigrants. Predictably, the left has launched legal challenges, and a federal judge has issued a temporary block—but this fight is far from over.
In Wong Kim Ark (1898), SCOTUS made a critical error. Over Justice Harlan’s sharp dissent, the Court extended birthright citizenship to children of legal aliens, misinterpreting the 14th Amendment. Even so, Wong Kim Ark only addressed legal aliens.
For decades, the issue of illegal alien birthright citizenship lay dormant. Then, in Plyler v. Doe (1982), the Court irresponsibly slipped in a non-binding footnote suggesting that Wong Kim Ark applied to illegal aliens. This footnote was nothing more than dicta—an opinion with no legal weight. Yet, the left has used it to push the false narrative that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to the children of illegal aliens.
Let’s be clear: SCOTUS has never ruled that children of illegal aliens are entitled to citizenship under the 14th Amendment. The left’s open-borders narrative is built on shaky legal ground and bad precedent.
Trump’s executive order is a necessary step toward correcting decades of judicial overreach and political exploitation. The Citizenship Clause wasn’t written to reward lawbreaking or undermine national sovereignty.
This isn’t just about immigration—it’s about restoring constitutional clarity.