\n<\/p>\n
The U.S. State Department has proposed requiring parents applying for passports for their \u200bchildren to provide proof of their own citizenship or immigration status as part of President Donald Trump\u2019s latest effort to limit birthright \u200ccitizenship.<\/strong><\/p>\n The draft guidance, reviewed by Reuters, is the first detailed look at how the State Department could enforce Trump\u2019s August 6 executive order targeting what it calls \u201cbirth tourism\u201d and broadening historical exceptions to birthright citizenship.<\/p>\n The White House referred Reuters questions to the State Department. In a statement, State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott said that \u201cPresident Trump has been unequivocal that \u200bthis Administration will protect the meaning and value of American citizenship, full stop, and that includes making sure our passport adjudication process fully \u200breflects that standard.\u201d<\/p>\n Limiting birthright citizenship has been one of the president\u2019s top priorities in his far-reaching crackdown on immigration. The \u2060U.S. Supreme Court ruled his previous attempt violated the country\u2019s Constitution.<\/p>\n Trump\u2019s initial executive order would have granted automatic U.S. citizenship at birth only to children \u200bwith at least one parent who was a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident known as a green card holder.<\/p>\n In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme \u200bCourt found the order was unlawful, with a majority finding it violated the Citizenship Clause of the Constitution\u2019s 14th Amendment.<\/p>\n IMPLEMENTING TRUMP\u2019S ORDER<\/strong><\/p>\n Trump\u2019s August 6 order was narrower, taking particular aim at \u201cbirth tourism,\u201d in which women travel to the United States to give birth so their children can obtain automatic citizenship. That order could still be blocked in court.<\/p>\n The \u200bnew directive would withhold citizenship from children with a parent who works for a foreign government in the U.S., is engaged in fraud or a \u200bcommercial transaction to obtain citizenship, or is classified as an \u201calien enemy.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe Department will require parental information and evidence of parental citizenship or immigration status as part of its determination \u200cwhether the \u2060applicant is subject to EO 14418,\u201d the State Department draft guidance reads, citing the executive order number.<\/p>\n If implemented, the proposal would require all parents or legal guardians to provide proof of their citizenship, such as a valid U.S. passport or birth certificate, or evidence of their immigration status, such as an I-94 form or a legal permanent residency card, when submitting a passport application for their children. The information would be used by the government to determine if the \u200bchild qualifies for citizenship under the \u200bnew order, the State Department proposal \u2060says.<\/p>\n Currently, parents whose children were born in the U.S. only need to prove their parentage and present photo identification during this process. They are also asked to check a box on the application form indicating if they are \u200bU.S. citizens but are not required to file supporting documentation.<\/p>\n Lawyers pursuing class-action lawsuits on behalf of babies who would \u200bbe deprived of citizenship \u2060under Trump\u2019s initial order have asked two different federal judges to prevent his latest order from taking effect.<\/p>\n One of those lawsuits is before U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman, who was appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden.<\/p>\n At a hearing on Friday in Greenbelt, Maryland, Boardman voiced skepticism about what she called Trump\u2019s unprecedented order and \u2060allowed the \u200bplaintiffs to revise their lawsuit so she could consider whether to block it.<\/p>\n Justice Department attorneys have \u200bargued that a restraining order would be inappropriate and that the legal challenge was premature, as federal agencies had yet to issue public guidance on how the president\u2019s directive would be implemented.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n