House Speaker Mike Johnson says Congress needs to restrict birthright citizenship for illegal aliens—a concession millions of Americans reached years ago while their leaders looked the other way.
The Louisiana Republican told Fox News Sunday that so-called "birthright tourism" has "devalued" American citizenship and is "a threat to the rule of law and national security." He said Republicans are "looking at all angles" and would "advance that immediately" if a viable bill emerges. It's the right sentiment. It's also years overdue.
Johnson's comments come after the Supreme Court struck down President Trump's executive order seeking to redefine birthright citizenship. In Trump v. Barbara, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority that children born to parents unlawfully or temporarily in the United States satisfy the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause. Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh joined the majority—though Kavanaugh separately concurred that Congress itself could establish statutory exceptions.
Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented. Alito argued for an allegiance-based conception of citizenship; Thomas offered what HotAir described as "a masterclass in history." Both dissents track with the actual legislative record of the 14th Amendment—a record USA Today never mentions.
Here's what the press won't tell you: The Citizenship Clause's principal author, Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan, said the language was "simply declaratory of... the law of the land already"—meaning the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which deliberately withheld birthright citizenship from children of those "subject to any foreign power." Senate Judiciary Chairman Lyman Trumbull confirmed at the time that "subject to the jurisdiction" meant those "not owing allegiance to anybody else." That's why American Indians—whose allegiances were to their tribes—weren't covered until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. If tribal members' children weren't automatically citizens, the children of illegal aliens certainly weren't either.
USA Today framed the birth tourism numbers as "highly disputed," citing estimates between 2,000 and 39,000 annually, and gave top billing to 140 university professors who called it "an infinitesimal proportion" of births. What USA Today buried: the magnet effect. Birthright citizenship isn't just about the babies born here—it's the anchor that chains entire illegal populations to the country through chain migration. Sen. Ted Cruz called it a "blatant abuse of our immigration laws." Sen. Peter Welch, a Vermont Democrat, waved it off as a "pretty marginal issue." That tells you everything about who's paying the price and who isn't.
HotAir laid out a more aggressive path: Congress could declare illegal aliens and birth tourists the functional equivalent of foreign invaders under the Constitution's four invasion clauses. Law professor Josh Blackman has noted that the Constitution "affords Congress, the president, and the states the power to declare an invasion—every branch except the judiciary." Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has already invoked invasion authority at the state level.
Legislation already exists. Sen. Lindsey Graham and Rep. Brian Babin introduced a bill last year narrowing the definition of persons "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. The bill acknowledges the 14th Amendment right but construes it as the framers intended—excluding those who owe allegiance to foreign powers.
Johnson also said he'd try to pass the SAVE America Act through budget reconciliation. We've heard promises before.
The Speaker is saying the right things. The question is whether this Congress will finally act—or whether birthright citizenship reform goes the way of every other border promise the leadership class has made and broken.
