What ending birthright citizenship could mean for Americans
For more than 100 years, the government has assumed that anyone born in the country is a US citizen
Ending universal birthright citizenship (UBC) in the United States would be a major change.
For more than 100 years, the government has assumed that anyone born in the country is a US citizen.
This idea comes from an 1898 Supreme Court ruling, and it shapes how federal, state, and local agencies decide who is a citizen.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
Changing this rule would affect how people prove their citizenship and how government systems work, says a paper titled "The Consequences of Ending Birthright Citizenship" published in SSRN.
How would people prove they are citizens?
Today, most Americans use a birth certificate to show they are citizens. If UBC ends, a birth certificate would no longer be enough for many people. They might have to show extra documents, such as their parents' birth certificates, passports, or immigration papers.
Federal agencies like the Department of State and the Social Security Administration (SSA) would no longer accept some birth certificates as full proof of citizenship. For example, when applying for a passport, a person might need to provide documents about their parents' status. The SSA would also have to change how it issues Social Security numbers for newborns.
Since about half of Americans do not have passports, many people could have trouble proving their own citizenship, especially when applying for documents for their children.
What would change for government agencies?
The US does not have a single national birth registry. Instead, thousands of state and local offices issue birth certificates. Ending UBC would force these offices to create new rules to check parents' legal status when a child is born.
This would likely cause:
- Many different rules in different states
- Extra work for hospitals and local agencies
- More paperwork for federal agencies that are used to relying on simple birth records
State-run programs that handle federal benefits-like Medicaid or SNAP-would also struggle to verify who counts as a citizen without relying on birth certificates alone.
Would citizenship rules vary by state?
Most likely, yes. States and local governments would create their own requirements for checking parental status. One state might accept a parent's birth certificate, while another might ask for more documents.
This would weaken the idea of citizenship being the same everywhere in the country. Instead, the rules could start to look like the uneven system that existed before the Civil War, when different states had different definitions of citizenship.
How could this affect individuals?
Some children born in the US could become at risk if federal agencies refuse to treat their birth certificates as proof of citizenship. They might lose rights such as voting or sponsoring family members for immigration.
Families might find it hard to collect the extra documents required. Many parents do not have passports, and getting proof of their own parents' status might be difficult. Children who do not pass new checks could be delayed or even blocked from getting birth certificates or Social Security numbers, which they need later for school, jobs, and government benefits.
Would this increase social inequalities?
Yes. Groups that already face challenges-such as African Americans, low-income families, and people without college degrees-would likely be affected the most. These groups are less likely to have passports or other federal documents.
States could also create stricter rules for things like voting. If birth certificates stop being enough, people without passports could find it harder to register or vote.
How would this change national identity?
Ending UBC would move the US away from a simple, clear rule for who is a citizen. Instead, citizenship would depend more on parents' status and on local paperwork rules. This could make many Americans feel less secure about their own citizenship, even if their families have lived in the country for generations.
The result would be a system where proving citizenship becomes more complicated and inconsistent, and where people's experiences depend on where they live.
