A senior Republican lawmaker has escalated the battle over birthright citizenship, signaling that even a Supreme Court ruling may not settle the issue.
Rep. Randy Fine on Wednesday, April 22, said he is prepared to pursue a constitutional amendment to end automatic citizenship for children born in the United States to undocumented immigrants if the court does not side with efforts backed by President Donald Trump.
“It is disgusting that someone can sneak into this country, have a baby, and then they become a paperwork American,” Fine said. “We just learned that 10% of babies born in America shouldn’t even be here.”
He added a direct warning to the judiciary: “That’s why I’m calling on the Supreme Court to ban birthright citizens… And if they don’t solve this problem, I’ll be filing a constitutional amendment to ban birthright citizenship.”
Birthright citizenship court case
Fine’s comments come as the Supreme Court considers the legality of President Trump’s executive order seeking to limit birthright citizenship, a move that challenges long-standing interpretations of the 14th Amendment.
The amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born in the United States who is “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” For more than a century, that clause has broadly been understood to grant citizenship regardless of parents’ immigration status.
Also Read: Trump Receives Rare Support in Plan to Stop Birthright Citizenship
The Trump administration, however, is advancing a narrower interpretation. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer has argued before the court that citizenship should depend on whether a child’s parents are legally “domiciled” in the United States — effectively requiring lawful, permanent residence.
That argument has faced skepticism from several justices. During oral arguments, members of the court questioned whether “domicile” — a term not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution — can be read into the 14th Amendment.
Justice Neil Gorsuch raised doubts about tying citizenship to legal status, noting that immigration laws were far less developed when the amendment was adopted in 1868. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson argued the amendment was designed specifically to prevent Congress from restricting citizenship in this way.
Trump steps up pressure
President Trump has intensified his rhetoric, openly criticizing the judiciary and urging conservative justices to align more closely with his position as the court deliberates.
Earlier this week, he accused some Republican-appointed justices of giving Democrats “win after win,” while praising what he described as ideological unity among liberal justices.
Also Read: Attorney John Sauer Details How the U.S. Would Handle Children Born Without Birthright Citizenship
The president has also repeatedly claimed that the United States is unique in offering birthright citizenship — a statement widely disputed by legal scholars and international comparisons.
Fine’s proposed constitutional amendment represents a dramatic escalation, shifting the fight from the courts to the political arena.
Amending the Constitution would require a two-thirds majority in both chambers of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of U.S. states — a high bar that has historically made such changes rare.
The Supreme Court is expected to issue its ruling by late June, with Fine’s move signaling that some Republicans are preparing for a scenario in which the apex court rejects the administration’s legal arguments.
