Washington — On Thursday, August 7th, 2026, President Trump signed two executive orders in an ongoing effort to restrict birthright citizenship for certain children born in the United States. This action follows the Supreme Court's June decision to strike down his earlier executive order that sought to end birthright citizenship.

One of the new orders targets individuals involved in commercial "birth tourism," aiming to deny them access to the country. The other order broadens the categories of people deemed ineligible for birthright citizenship, including children of foreign citizens who lobby on behalf of foreign governments.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller described birth tourism as a longstanding issue, stating, "This has been something that people have talked about, not only for years, but for decades." He elaborated, "The idea that people come here pretending to be a tourist, pretending to be a visitor, saying they want to go to Disneyland or they want to go visit a monument or go to a national park, but the real reason they're here is to have a child, to make that child an automatic citizen, leave our country, and then have a U.S. citizen child."

One order specifies that children born to mothers who engaged in a commercial transaction to ensure their presence in the U.S. or its territories for childbirth should not be granted citizenship documents.

Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project, responded by stating, "Any executive order that tries to rewrite birthright citizenship will meet the same fate as the last one."

During related legal discussions, Chief Justice John Roberts told U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer, "You do agree that that has no impact on the legal analysis before us." Sauer commented that birth tourism highlights negative effects of the current interpretation of the Citizenship Clause, noting, "We're in a new world now … where 8 billion people are one plane ride away from having a child who is a U.S. citizen."

President Trump acknowledged the Supreme Court decision as "very unfortunate" and indicated adjustments would be made in response.

Sources