In a legal showdown over President Donald Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship, Republican attorneys general (AGs) from 18 states are filing an amicus brief to counter lawsuits filed by Democrat-led states and civil rights groups, challenging the legality of the order. The brief, set to be filed on Monday, seeks to defend the executive action and its focus on limiting automatic citizenship for children born in the United States to illegal immigrants or individuals on temporary visas.
Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird, who is spearheading the amicus brief, spoke with Fox News Digital on Monday, explaining that the brief supports Trump’s order as a necessary step to prevent the exploitation of the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. Bird pointed to the costs incurred by taxpayers when foreign nationals come to the U.S. to give birth and receive public assistance through Medicaid and other state programs.
“If someone comes on a tourist visa to have an anchor baby, they are not under that original meaning of the United States Constitution,” Bird said. “Oftentimes, when this has happened, it’s the taxpayers who are paying for the healthcare through Medicaid or through hospitals, paying for care for someone to have a child.”
The executive order also addresses the issue of “birth tourism,” where pregnant women travel to the U.S. specifically to give birth, granting their child citizenship. The brief filed by the Republican AGs argues that such practices create a powerful incentive for individuals to enter the U.S. illegally or temporarily, merely to secure citizenship for their child. The brief highlights reports of pregnant women crossing the U.S.-Mexico border in active labor to give birth on American soil, thereby claiming citizenship for their newborn.
There are also significant national security concerns presented by birth tourism, as America’s adversaries — especially Chinese nationals — continue to take advantage of this loophole, creating opportunities for espionage and nefarious activity.
Trump’s executive order has faced significant legal opposition from a coalition of Democrat-led states, including California, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and others. These states, along with Washington D.C. and the city of San Francisco, have filed a lawsuit asserting that the president does not have the constitutional authority to unilaterally change birthright citizenship.
In response to these legal challenges, Republican AGs argue that Trump’s order aligns with the original intent of the 14th Amendment and helps reduce the financial burden on taxpayers.
The issue of birthright citizenship has been a point of contention for years, particularly among conservatives who argue that the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause is being misinterpreted.
The 14th amendment was originally written for freed slaves, and historically didn’t apply to Native Americans. The United States is in a small minority of countries that permit the policy, and the Trump administration has made clear that they’re prepared to take the fight for its repeal to the highest court in the land.
READ NEXT: Trump Admin Plans To Take Birthright Citizenship Fight To The Supreme Court
