US President Donald Trump has defended his controversial decision to end birthright citizenship, arguing that the constitutional protection was originally designed for the children of enslaved people rather than wealthy immigrants. Trump made the remarks during an interview with Politico, months after signing an executive order to halt birthright citizenship on his first day back in office in January 2025.
Trump claimed that the legal precedent behind automatic citizenship for those born on US soil dates back to the post–Civil War era and was crafted specifically to secure the rights of formerly enslaved communities.
“The case was meant for the babies of slaves… not for some rich person coming from another country and suddenly their whole family becomes U.S. citizens,” he said, calling a potential Supreme Court ruling against him “devastating.”
The president reiterated that the provision emerged in the same historical period as the US Civil War and insisted that ending the practice was necessary because the country “cannot afford to house tens of millions of people.”
Background: Trump’s Executive Order and Legal Pushback
On January 20, 2025, Trump signed an executive order ending birthright citizenship for children born in the United States 30 days after that date.
Birthright citizenship is guaranteed under the 14th Amendment, added to the US Constitution in 1868 to grant citizenship to formerly enslaved individuals and all those born on American soil.
Following the executive order, multiple federal courts blocked the policy. However, in June 2025, the Supreme Court ruled that lower courts lack the authority to issue sweeping nationwide injunctions against executive orders. As a result, the Supreme Court itself took the matter up for a full constitutional review.
Impact on Immigrants and National Debate
The administration has argued that automatic citizenship encourages birth tourism and places financial pressure on public systems. Critics, however, say the move violates the Constitution and disproportionately targets immigrant communities.
The issue has triggered nationwide debate, with legal scholars and civil rights groups closely watching the Supreme Court’s next steps. The ruling is expected to shape the future of US immigration policy and constitutional interpretation.
