New executive orders signed by President Donald Trump on Thursday, Aug. 6, are facing criticism from immigration and legal experts who argue they do little to address a small, already unlawful practice and could illegally "put a question mark" on citizenship.
The orders target foreigners coming to the United States to give birth, a practice known as "birth tourism." This practice is already prohibited by federal code, and critics contend that such visitors are abusing birthright citizenship, the principle enshrined in the 14th Amendment that grants U.S. citizenship to individuals born on American soil. The Supreme Court upheld this standard in June.
Experts question the effectiveness of Trump's orders in addressing what is statistically a minor issue. Estimates suggest birth tourism accounts for less than 1% of all annual births in the U.S.
"My initial impression is that most of it is unconstitutional or in violation of federal statute," said Amanda Frost, a professor at the University of Virginia Law School and author on birthright citizenship. "Provisions clearly violate what the 14th Amendment has always meant and what the Supreme Court just upheld."
Critics voiced concerns that the orders could negatively impact mothers seeking medical care in the United States and be used by the administration to denaturalize some American citizens. David Leopold, an immigration attorney, stated, "It’s about putting a question mark next to the citizenship, which is very dangerous."
These executive orders follow a previous attempt by the White House to curb birthright citizenship, a law in place since the 14th Amendment's ratification in 1868. The administration's prior effort to eliminate birthright citizenship was rejected by the Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision.
"I thought we were going to win at the Supreme Court; unfortunately, we had a bad decision, a very unfair decision. Our country suffers because of it," Trump remarked in the Oval Office after signing the new orders. "So, we’re ending it a different way."
The White House considers birth tourism a significant problem, with Trump claiming hundreds of thousands of babies are born annually to birth tourists in the U.S. However, studies indicate the practice is statistically insignificant. The Migration Policy Institute estimates between 10,000 and 26,000 such births occur annually, representing less than 1% of the over 3.5 million births each year.
"The scale of the problem is rather small," commented Colleen Putzel-Kavanaugh, an analyst at the Migration Policy Institute who co-authored a study on the issue. She acknowledged, however, that "it does present policy issues, including visa fraud and tax evasion."
Legal experts emphasize that federal regulations already prohibit individuals from lying on visa forms or entering the country with the intent to give birth. White House descriptions of birth tourists have been characterized as misleading by those who study the topic.
Stephen Miller, a senior Trump advisor, described birth tourism as an abuse exploiting the U.S. welfare system. However, experts note that the practice is typically engaged in by wealthy individuals. Trump himself acknowledged this, telling reporters that participants are often "multimillionaires" and "billionaires." Putzel-Kavanaugh explained that the fees associated with birth tourism companies create an elite group, with mothers seeking to provide U.S. citizenship as a valuable future benefit for their children.
Reportedly, fees for these services range from $20,000 to $100,000, according to the Migration Policy Institute. Past participants have included Chinese mothers seeking to have a second child during the country's one-child policy era, as well as individuals from less stable countries.
The federal government has prosecuted illegal birth tourism operations. In 2019, a Chinese national was prosecuted for running You Win USA Vacation Services Corp. in California, which facilitated approximately 500 births. The company charged between $40,000 and $80,000 for services that included arranging housing for expectant mothers.
Despite these instances, experts maintain that children are not responsible for their parents' actions, and birthright citizenship is firmly established in the 14th Amendment and upheld by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court's June 30 ruling against an earlier Trump executive order stated the president cannot alter birthright citizenship's definition unilaterally, warning that such attempts threatened established constitutional understanding.
"'Born in the USA' is a phrase that carries power," said Frost. "This goes to the heart of what it means to be an American. We’re a country founded on the idea that we reject hereditary status, titles of nobility; we reject any kind of lineage-backed definition of citizenship. To be an American is to be here."
Some critics argue that the legality or redundancy of the new orders is secondary to the administration's intent to question the citizenship status of some Americans. Leopold elaborated, "This is about putting a question mark next to somebody’s citizenship, whether the parent was in the country without authorization or whether the mother came here as a visitor."
Leopold also pointed to previous administration efforts to revoke citizenship, citing a June 2025 Department of Justice memo directing lawyers to seek revocation of citizenship from individuals who became citizens "illegally." He concluded, "It’s one more part of their all-out assault on immigration, on the people who have naturalized, on groups of Americans they don’t believe should be in this country."
