Ending Birthright Citizenship Fraud


In a bold move, Rep. Matt Gaetz has proposed a bill to end birthright citizenship, aiming to amend the immigration and nationality act. This legislation, if passed, would bring about significant changes to the way citizenship is acquired in the United States. The proposed change is rooted in the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, and its potential impact on the immigration system has garnered both support and criticism. In this article, we will dive deeper into the details of this bill and explore the arguments surrounding the need to end birthright citizenship fraud.

The Proposed Change in Legislation and its Implications

The legislation put forth by Rep. Matt Gaetz seeks to deny automatic citizenship to children born in the U.S. unless their parents are U.S. nationals, lawfully admitted refugees, permanent residents, or actively serving in the U.S. armed forces. This change aims to address the issue of birthright citizenship fraud, where individuals exploit the system by giving birth on U.S. soil solely to secure citizenship for themselves or their children.

Supporters of this bill argue that birthright citizenship was intended for children born to legal residents and citizens, and not for those who strategically choose to have children on U.S. soil to take advantage of the benefits associated with American citizenship. They believe that by denying automatic citizenship, the proposed legislation would discourage birthright citizenship fraud and ensure that citizenship is awarded to those who truly merit it.

Constitutional Implications and Criticism

Critics, however, are examining the constitutional implications of such a change. The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” They argue that birthright citizenship is a fundamental constitutional right and should not be altered through legislation.

Furthermore, opponents of the bill caution against potential unintended consequences. They argue that denying automatic citizenship to children born in the U.S. could create a two-tiered system, where individuals who were born in the country but do not have citizenship face difficulties accessing basic rights and opportunities. This, they say, would be contrary to the principles on which the United States was founded.

The Support and Backlash

Conservative commentator Charlie Kirk has applauded Rep. Gaetz’s legislation, calling on Republicans to support this change. He believes that putting an end to birthright citizenship fraud is a crucial step in protecting the integrity of the immigration system and ensuring that citizenship is granted only to those who deserve it.

However, there are others who are skeptical of this proposal. They argue that birthright citizenship, as it stands currently, is an inclusive policy that reflects the nation’s commitment to equality and fairness. They fear that any change to this policy could have far-reaching consequences and further complicate an already contentious issue in the ongoing immigration debate.


The proposal to end birthright citizenship fraud is a controversial topic that demands careful consideration. It raises questions about constitutional rights, immigration policies, and the potential impact of such a change on society as a whole. As Rep. Gaetz’s bill moves forward, it is important to thoroughly examine the arguments on both sides and assess the long-term consequences of altering birthright citizenship. While the intention to curb fraud is commendable, the risks and implications must be carefully weighed to ensure a fair and just immigration system for all.