Birthright citizenship, guaranteed by the 14th Amendment’s jus soli principle, grants U.S. citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil, regardless of parents’ legal status. Recently, it has come under scrutiny following an Executive Order seeking to limit citizenship for children of noncitizens, now being challenged in court. Legal scholars, civil rights advocates, and lawmakers are also questioning whether it should be altered, and if so, what it would mean to be born in the U.S. Supporters argue the 14th Amendment was meant to make citizenship a right, not a privilege, and that it prevents children from being punished for their parents’ status while encouraging long-term economic and civic contributions. Ending birthright citizenship would also create a permanent underclass of vulnerable stateless children born and raised in America but denied the rights of full citizens, such as healthcare and education. Critics say it fuels illegal immigration, encourages “birth tourism,” and grants citizenship to children of those with no legal ties to the U.S. They argue this creates perverse incentives and strains an already overburdened immigration system.
With this legal context, Open to Debate, in partnership with Arizona State University, debates the question: Should America End Birthright Citizenship?
Arguing YES: Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies and Horace Cooper, Senior Fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research; Chairman of the Project 21 National Advisory Board
Arguing NO: Kris Mayes, Arizona Attorney General and Chris Newman, Legal Director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON)
Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates