The Anchors Away Act restricts birthright citizenship to children of U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, or active-duty military personnel, and establishes new grounds of inadmissibility for certain pregnant nonimmigrants.
Andrew Ogles
Representative
TN-5
The Anchors Away Act proposes limiting birthright citizenship to children born to at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen, a lawful permanent resident, or an alien serving in the U.S. Armed Forces. Additionally, the bill establishes new grounds for inadmissibility for pregnant nonimmigrants who are not married to U.S. citizens, unless they are seeking medical treatment.
The 'Anchors Away Act' proposes a fundamental shift in how the United States grants citizenship to children born on its soil. Under current standards, almost everyone born here is a citizen, but this bill seeks to narrow that window significantly. Specifically, Section 2 of the bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to state that a child born in the U.S. is only a citizen at birth if at least one parent is a U.S. citizen, a lawful permanent resident living here, or an immigrant on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces. This essentially creates a three-tier checklist for parents; if you don't check one of those boxes at the moment of birth, your child wouldn't automatically get that blue passport.
This change moves the goalposts for thousands of families. For example, consider a couple where both parents are in the U.S. on valid work visas (like an H-1B) but haven't secured permanent residency (a Green Card) yet. Under Section 2, a child born to them would no longer be an automatic U.S. citizen. The bill attempts to redefine the 14th Amendment’s phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' to exclude anyone whose parents don't meet these specific legal categories. While it wouldn't be retroactive—meaning anyone born before the bill becomes law keeps their status—it creates a future where two children born in the same hospital wing could have entirely different legal rights based solely on their parents' paperwork status at that hour.
Section 3 of the bill adds a new layer of complexity for international travel and immigration. It makes any non-citizen who is pregnant and not married to a U.S. citizen 'inadmissible' to the country. This means if a pregnant woman tries to enter the U.S. on a tourist or business visa, she could be turned away at the border or denied a visa entirely. There is a specific carve-out for those seeking 'legitimate medical treatment relating to childbirth,' but for everyone else—from a tech consultant attending a conference to a daughter visiting her family—pregnancy becomes a legal barrier to entry. This provision effectively treats pregnancy as a disqualifying condition for crossing the border unless you have a marriage certificate to a citizen in hand.
The bill includes a 'severability' clause in Section 5, which is essentially a legal backup plan. It says that if a court strikes down one part of the law (like the citizenship redefinition), the rest of the rules (like the pregnancy travel restrictions) stay in place. The most immediate impact for regular people would be a massive increase in red tape. Parents would likely need to provide much more than just a birth certificate to prove their child’s citizenship; they’d need to produce their own Green Cards or military orders from the date of birth. For families with mixed immigration status, this could lead to 'stateless' children who aren't citizens of the U.S. but may not have a clear path to citizenship in their parents' home countries either, creating a complicated legal headache that could last for generations.