In a panel hosted by American Community Media, leading experts in constitutional law, immigration, and civil rights warned that Trump’s plan to end birthright citizenship would mark a radical break with U.S. legal tradition—undermining the 14th Amendment, generating statelessness, and deepening the country’s democratic crisis.
At the panel Can President Trump Legally End Birthright Citizenship?, organized by American Community Media, constitutional law, immigration, and civil rights experts agreed on a crucial point: the proposal to eliminate birthright citizenship is not only unconstitutional—it could trigger a severe legal and humanitarian crisis.
During the event, participants analyzed the executive order announced by Donald Trump for the first day of a hypothetical second term. The order seeks to end automatic citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants or temporary visa holders. This move threatens to create a generation of stateless children in a country where birthright citizenship has been a cornerstone since the 19th century.
A Direct Attack on the 14th Amendment
“The president cannot simply sign a document and decide who is a citizen and who is not. That’s defined by the Constitution,” warned Martin Kim, Director of Immigration Advocacy at Asian Americans Advancing Justice (AAJC). According to Kim, the executive order represents an unprecedented attempt to reinterpret the 14th Amendment, which has guaranteed citizenship to all persons born on U.S. soil since 1868, with very limited exceptions.
“Trump’s proposal is dangerous. It seeks to exert unilateral power to decide who belongs in this country. If citizenship can be taken away at will, the right is weakened for everyone—not just immigrants,” he explained.
Kim also criticized the lack of clarity on how the order would be implemented: “There’s no plan. Hospitals and state agencies wouldn’t know how to respond if this were enacted. It would generate legal, administrative, and human chaos.”
255,000 Babies a Year—No Country, No Rights
From a demographic research standpoint, Julia Gelatt, Associate Director of the U.S. Immigration Policy Program at the Migration Policy Institute, argued that the order would have the opposite effect of its stated goal.
“The order claims it would reduce irregular migration, but the real impact would be the opposite. In 20 years, the population without citizenship would increase by 2.7 million. In 50 years, it would reach 5.4 million,” Gelatt stated.
According to her projections, around 255,000 babies would be born in the U.S. each year without automatic access to citizenship. Many would fall into a legal limbo. “If their parents are from countries with strained diplomatic ties—like Venezuela or Russia—it’s likely they wouldn’t be able to register their children at their consulates. That would render them stateless,” she warned.
Beyond the legal implications, Gelatt pointed to broader social consequences: “These children would grow up without access to scholarships, legal employment, or full rights. That affects the entire country. This is not just about immigrants—it’s about our collective future.”
A Political Offensive Against Latinos
From a legal perspective, César Ruiz, attorney at Latino Justice, denounced the measure as part of a broader strategy to dehumanize the Latino population.
“We knew that behind Trump’s campaign rhetoric, concrete actions against our community would follow. This is an escalation. That’s why we’ve filed a lawsuit from New York—a state with a rich history of welcoming immigrants,” Ruiz said.
He explained that his organization represents two institutions—the New York Immigration Coalition and Rural Migrant Ministries—as well as two vulnerable individuals. “We’re defending people who currently have children who, if this order takes effect, would be born without citizenship. That’s unacceptable,” he emphasized.
Ruiz also stressed the political motive behind the legal offensive. “It’s no coincidence this proposal is emerging in an election year. The goal is to mobilize a conservative base by appealing to fear, misinformation, and ethnic resentment.”
Citizenship Is Not Negotiable
For Professor Robert S. Chang, Executive Director of the Korematsu Center for Law & Equality at UC Irvine School of Law, the debate goes far beyond immigration policy. “Birthright citizenship is a cornerstone of our democracy. Eliminating it raises the question of who is allowed to fully participate in the political, economic, and social life of the United States,” he asserted.
Chang also highlighted the historical dimension of this legal offensive. He recalled that the 14th Amendment was created as a direct response to efforts to exclude Black Americans from the national pact after the abolition of slavery.
“Slaveholders, segregationists, and now ultraconservatives have historically tried to limit this right. We cannot allow that cycle to repeat,” he stressed.
In his view, undoing birthright citizenship would reverse more than 150 years of civil rights progress. “Being a citizen by birth is not a privilege the state grants—it’s a constitutional right that protects the dignity and equality of every person,” he concluded.