The Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025 restricts birthright citizenship to individuals born in the U.S. to at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen, a lawful permanent resident, or an alien in lawful status serving in the U.S. armed forces.
Lindsey Graham
Senator
SC
The Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025 amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to restrict birthright citizenship to individuals born in the United States who have at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen, a lawful permanent resident, or an alien in lawful status serving in the U.S. armed forces. This legislation clarifies the definition of being "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" for citizenship purposes. These changes would apply only to individuals born after the bill's enactment, preserving the status of those born previously.
The Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025 seeks to fundamentally change who is automatically considered a U.S. citizen when born on American soil. Currently, under the 14th Amendment’s long-standing interpretation, nearly everyone born in the U.S. is a citizen. This bill, however, amends Section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to create a specific checklist for what it means to be "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States." To qualify for citizenship at birth under this new rule, at least one of a child's parents must be a U.S. citizen or national, a lawful permanent resident (green card holder) living in the U.S., or an immigrant on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces.
This bill essentially moves the goalposts for automatic citizenship by focusing on the legal status of the parents rather than just the location of the birth. Under Section 2, if a child is born in a U.S. hospital today to parents who are here on temporary work visas that don't grant permanent residency, or to parents who are undocumented, that child would no longer automatically receive a U.S. passport or the rights that come with citizenship. For a local construction worker or a software developer on a temporary H-1B visa, this means their child’s legal standing would be tied directly to the parent's specific visa type or residency status at the moment of birth. The bill does include a "grandfather clause," ensuring that anyone born before the Act is signed into law keeps their current status, so you don't have to worry about your own citizenship being revoked retroactively.
The legislation does provide a clear "green light" for certain groups. For instance, a child born to an immigrant serving in the U.S. Army would be explicitly recognized as a citizen at birth under the "active service" provision. However, the real-world friction arises for families who fall outside these three specific buckets. By narrowing the definition of "jurisdiction," the bill could create a significant new class of residents who are born in the U.S. but remain foreign nationals. This could lead to a two-tiered system in schools and workplaces where individuals born in the same town have vastly different legal rights and access to government services based on their parents' paperwork from decades prior.
Because this bill provides a very specific definition of residency and status, it reduces some bureaucratic guesswork, but it increases the stakes for record-keeping. Parents would likely need to provide proof of their own citizenship, green card status, or military orders at the time of birth to secure a child's birth certificate and Social Security number. This adds a layer of red tape for hospitals and new parents alike. Furthermore, because this bill targets the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, it sets the stage for a major legal shift in how we define belonging in the U.S., potentially impacting everything from tax obligations to eligibility for federal student loans for the next generation.