Here’s what Republicans are thinking now.
A Republican senator is asking the Trump administration to investigate whether children born in the United States to accredited foreign diplomats improperly received documents identifying them as American citizens.
The request does not mean President Donald Trump has ordered a broad revocation of citizenship. Instead, Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., wants federal officials to identify and cancel citizenship documents that he believes may have been issued unlawfully in a narrow category of cases.
Schmitt sent his request Thursday to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin. His letter calls for a coordinated review by the State Department and Department of Homeland Security.
Who Could Be Affected?
Schmitt’s request focuses exclusively on children born in the United States to accredited foreign diplomats.
Under a longstanding interpretation of the 14th Amendment, most people born on American soil receive citizenship automatically. The amendment, however, applies to individuals born in the United States who are also “subject to the jurisdiction” of the country.
Accredited foreign diplomats generally receive special legal protections and are not considered fully subject to American jurisdiction. As a result, federal policy has traditionally held that their U.S.-born children do not automatically become American citizens.
This diplomatic exception is different from the far broader controversy involving children born to illegal immigrants, tourists and other temporary visitors.
Senator Calls for Federal Investigation
Schmitt wants federal agencies to determine whether any diplomats’ children improperly obtained records commonly used as proof of citizenship.
His requested actions include:
- Investigating potentially unauthorized citizenship documents
- Determining how many cases may be involved
- Identifying individuals who received records improperly
- Revoking unlawfully issued citizenship documentation
- Establishing stronger screening procedures for future births
The senator argues that government agencies may not have adequate safeguards for identifying diplomatic parents before birth certificates, Social Security numbers or other records are issued.
Schmitt believes these administrative weaknesses could allow someone who was never legally a citizen to possess documents suggesting otherwise.
Does This Mean Citizenship Would Be Taken Away?
That question depends on the circumstances of each case.
Schmitt is not asking federal officials to remove valid citizenship from lawful American citizens. He is asking them to revoke documents allegedly issued to people who, under the diplomatic exception, never obtained citizenship at birth.
That legal distinction could become important if the administration conducts the requested investigation.
Receiving a birth certificate or Social Security number does not necessarily settle a person’s citizenship status. Birth certificates document the circumstances of a birth, while Social Security numbers are also issued to some noncitizens.
Federal authorities would need to examine the individual records, determine what documentation was issued and establish whether it was obtained legally.
USCIS Recognizes the Diplomatic Exception
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has long stated that a child born in the United States to an accredited foreign diplomatic officer generally does not acquire citizenship automatically.
Such children may qualify to register as lawful permanent residents under federal law. That process, however, is different from receiving citizenship at birth.
Schmitt says the government must do more to ensure that this exception is enforced consistently.
He cited reports and legal scholarship suggesting that potentially thousands of diplomats’ children may have received citizenship-related records. That figure remains an allegation and would need to be verified through the investigation he is requesting.
Birthright Citizenship Returns to Congress
Schmitt’s letter arrived shortly after he introduced the American Citizenship Act, legislation designed to narrow eligibility for automatic citizenship at birth.
His bill would generally reserve birthright citizenship for children with at least one parent who is:
- An American citizen
- A lawful permanent resident
- Otherwise covered by a qualifying legal category under the legislation
The proposal is intended to prevent automatic citizenship for children born to illegal immigrants and temporary foreign visitors, including people accused of participating in “birth tourism.”
Birth tourism is the practice of entering the United States mainly to have a baby who will receive U.S. citizenship at birth.
Supporters of Schmitt’s approach argue that citizenship is a valuable national bond and should not serve as an incentive for illegal immigration or the exploitation of immigration laws.
Supreme Court Decision Blocked Trump’s Policy
The Supreme Court ruled on June 30 that children born in the United States to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present are citizens at birth under the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause.
The decision blocked Trump’s executive order seeking to deny automatic citizenship to those children.
Schmitt strongly disagreed with the ruling. He contends that the court adopted an overly expansive interpretation of the 14th Amendment and departed from its original meaning.
His American Citizenship Act is intended to reopen the dispute through Congress and potentially return the constitutional question to the federal courts.
However, the court’s decision continued to recognize the separate and longstanding exception for children of accredited diplomats. Schmitt’s latest letter concentrates on enforcing that narrower exception.
Supporters Cite Sovereignty and National Security
Schmitt argues that improperly issued citizenship records weaken the integrity of the country’s immigration system.
In his view, allowing someone to claim citizenship through documents that should never have been issued could undermine American sovereignty and create national security concerns.
Many conservatives also maintain that the federal government has a responsibility to determine precisely who qualifies as a citizen. They say immigration enforcement should include accurate recordkeeping and meaningful consequences when government documents are obtained improperly.
As chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Schmitt has made reforming birthright citizenship a major legislative priority.
He previously supported Trump’s executive order in court and has discussed the possibility of pursuing a constitutional amendment.
Civil Liberties Groups Oppose Restrictions
Civil liberties organizations have strongly resisted broader efforts to limit birthright citizenship.
The American Civil Liberties Union argues that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to nearly everyone born in the United States, regardless of a parent’s immigration status. The group also maintains that a president cannot rewrite that constitutional protection through an executive order.
The diplomatic exception is more firmly established because accredited diplomats hold a special legal status under American and international law.
Any attempt to expand citizenship restrictions beyond that narrow category would likely produce additional lawsuits and constitutional challenges.
What Happens Next?
Schmitt’s letter does not revoke anyone’s citizenship or citizenship documents by itself.
The State Department and Department of Homeland Security must decide whether to open an investigation. If they proceed, officials would need to determine:
- Whether citizenship records were issued improperly
- How many individuals may be involved
- Whether the recipients knew they were ineligible
- What authority exists to cancel the documents
- Whether affected individuals can challenge the action in court
No official number of potentially affected people has been confirmed.
The issue could ultimately produce two separate battles: an administrative investigation involving diplomats’ children and a much broader congressional fight over birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants and temporary visitors.
For Schmitt and his supporters, the dispute is about protecting the meaning of American citizenship. Opponents see it as a threat to constitutional protections that have existed for generations.
Either way, immigration and birthright citizenship appear likely to remain major political and legal issues as the Trump administration considers its next move.