English
English
English
Trump’s move to end birth right citizenship has ignited a constitutional showdown, as he claims the 14th Amendment was meant only for the children of slave- not today’s immigrants. Now the Supreme Court must decide how far a president can redefine citizenship.
Trump ends birthright citizenship in the US
New Delhi: US President Donald Trump has reiterated his justification for ending birthright citizenship, arguing that the constitutional provision was originally meant for the children of enslaved people rather than affluent immigrants.
In an interview with Politico, Trump defended the executive order he signed on his first day back in office in January 2025, a decision that has since sparked intense legal and political battles.
Speaking about the policy, Trump asserted that the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause granting citizenship to anyone born on US soil was created in the aftermath of the Civil War specifically to ensure rights for formerly enslaved individuals and their children.
Donald Trump threatens India with new tariffs amid India-Russia ties; Click for details
“The case is very interesting because that case was meant for the babies of slaves,” Trump said. “It was not meant for some rich person coming from another country, putting a foot in our country, and all of a sudden their whole family becomes United States citizens.”
The president suggested that modern interpretations of the clause had expanded it far beyond its original intent. He insisted that supporters of his policy now “understand” the historical context and that the Supreme Court would recognize this as well.
Trump’s executive order stated that children born in the United States more than 30 days after January 20, 2025, would no longer be eligible for automatic citizenship. The administration argued the move was necessary to address what Trump described as unsustainable pressures on national resources.
“Our country cannot afford to house tens of millions of people,” he said, tying the policy directly to his broader immigration agenda.
Trump hits out at EU for X penalty; Claims Europe is ‘Heading the Wrong Way’
Multiple federal courts quickly blocked the order, prompting a fierce constitutional dispute. In June 2025, the Supreme Court intervened ruling that lower federal courts lacked the authority to issue sweeping nationwide injunctions against presidential orders. The justices subsequently agreed to take up the case themselves, setting the stage for a landmark decision on the future of birthright citizenship.
The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, was designed to secure citizenship for formerly enslaved people and others born on US soil. Whether a president can reinterpret or limit that guarantee through executive action remains the central question now before the Supreme Court.
As the nation awaits the ruling, Trump continues to frame the debate around historical intent—while critics argue the constitutional text leaves little room for reinterpretation.
