{"id":1879,"date":"2026-04-16T03:38:09","date_gmt":"2026-04-16T03:38:09","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lavoz.us.com\/homepage\/?p=1879"},"modified":"2026-04-16T03:38:09","modified_gmt":"2026-04-16T03:38:09","slug":"between-the-law-and-its-consequences-experts-warn-of-the-risks-of-eliminating-birthright-citizenship-in-the-u-s","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lavoz.us.com\/homepage\/ethnic-media-services\/between-the-law-and-its-consequences-experts-warn-of-the-risks-of-eliminating-birthright-citizenship-in-the-u-s\/","title":{"rendered":"Between the Law and Its Consequences: Experts Warn of the Risks of Eliminating Birthright Citizenship in the U.S."},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In a panel organized by American Community Media (ACoM), legal, demographic, and immigration specialists examined the potential elimination of birthright citizenship, warning of economic, social, and generational consequences that could reshape the country\u2019s structure.<\/strong>
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As the issue returns to the forefront of the U.S. political agenda, the possibility of eliminating birthright citizenship -guaranteed by the 14th Amendment- raises questions that go beyond the legal sphere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is this a constitutional debate or a redefinition of who belongs to the country? That question framed the panel organized by ACoM, where experts analyzed the implications of a measure that could affect millions of people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the center of the discussion is a Supreme Court decree promoted by President Donald Trump, which seeks to restrict automatic citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants or those with temporary status.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Moderated by journalist Sunita Sohrabji, the panel featured law professor Hiroshi Motomura (UCLA), researcher Phillip Connor (Princeton), demographer Julia Gelatt (Migration Policy Institute), and Xiao Wang, CEO of Boundless Immigration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

More than a legal reform: a redefinition of the country<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

For Motomura, the debate cannot be reduced to a legal interpretation. In an interview presented during the panel, the academic argued that birthright citizenship is rooted in a historical vision of the United States as an inclusive nation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe fundamental issue is what kind of country the United States is,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

He also explained that the 14th Amendment not only corrected historical exclusions -such as the Dred Scott decision- but also established a concept of belonging based on birth, rather than family origin.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In that sense, he warned that limiting this right would represent a profound shift in the country\u2019s identity, excluding individuals born and raised in the United States who could cease to be recognized as citizens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A Population Without Status: Social and Educational Effects<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of the most frequently cited consequences during the panel was the creation of a population without legal status. Julia Gelatt explained that, if birthright citizenship were eliminated, thousands of children would begin their lives in the United States without legal recognition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to her estimates, around 255,000 children per year could be born without status, which, over time, would significantly increase the unauthorized immigrant population.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For the specialist, this would not only have immediate consequences -such as limited access to public programs- but also long-term structural effects. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cA permanent class of excluded people would be created,\u201d she warned. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Noting that these limitations would restrict access to higher education, formal employment, and economic stability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

She also emphasized that these barriers could lower educational aspirations among young people, who would know that, even with advanced studies, they would be unable to access legal employment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The panel also examined how eliminating birthright citizenship could affect access to basic rights such as education. Panelists recalled the precedent set by \u2018\u2018Plyler v. Doe\u2019\u2019 (1982), which guarantees access to public education for all children regardless of immigration status. However, some states are already considering measures that could restrict this right, opening the door to new legal challenges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Experts warned that excluding children from the education system would carry not only individual consequences, but broader social ones. Limited access to education could result in a less prepared population, reduced job opportunities, and increased vulnerability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Economic Impact and Loss of Talent<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The economic analysis presented by Phillip Connor introduced another key dimension: the long-term impact on the U.S. economy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Using census data, the researcher estimated that millions of individuals who currently benefit from birthright citizenship have made significant contributions to the country\u2019s economic growth. In total, he calculated that these populations have generated at least $7.7 trillion in income over the past century.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He also projected that, if current policies remain in place, future generations could contribute at least an additional $1 trillion in the coming decades. However, he warned that eliminating this right would result in a substantial loss of skilled workers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cTwo-thirds of these individuals access occupations that require higher education\u201d, he explained.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He further noted that citizenship facilitates access to university education and, in turn, to better job opportunities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From another perspective, Xiao Wang emphasized that such a policy would also undermine the country\u2019s ability to attract international talent. \u201cPeople don\u2019t just evaluate a salary or a job, but whether they can build a stable life for their children,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a context where the United States could face a shortage of more than 86,000 doctors by 2036, immigration uncertainty could discourage professionals from coming to the country, particularly in critical sectors such as healthcare and in rural communities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A Decision That Can Redefine Lives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

One conclusion shared by the panelists was that birthright citizenship cannot be confined to an immediate legal debate. Its effects extend beyond the economy and politics to the lived realities of millions of migrant families.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Questioning this right, therefore, opens the door for thousands of children to grow up without legal recognition in the country where they were born. This risk is not abstract: it is directly tied to the U.S. immigration detention system, administered by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which already faces numerous allegations of abuse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2025, according to reports in The Guardian, at least 32 people died in ICE custody -the highest number in two decades- amid overcrowding, medical negligence, and deteriorating detention conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By 2026, that number continued to rise, with new deaths recorded in the first months of the year. Investigations and reports have also documented cases of prolonged isolation and physical abuse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Eliminating birthright citizenship not only redefines who belongs to the country, but also who is exposed to this system. More than a legal reform, what is at stake is the expansion of a structure of vulnerability that would disproportionately affect those who born there.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Entre la ley y sus consecuencias: expertos advierten sobre los riesgos de eliminar la ciudadan\u00eda por nacimiento en E.E.U.U.<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

En un panel organizado por American Community Media (ACoM), especialistas de derecho, demograf\u00eda y migraci\u00f3n analizaron el impacto de una posible eliminaci\u00f3n de la ciudadan\u00eda por nacimiento. Alertando sobre efectos econ\u00f3micos, sociales y generacionales que podr\u00edan transformar la estructura del pa\u00eds.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

En medio de un debate que ha vuelto al centro de la agenda pol\u00edtica en Estados Unidos, la posibilidad de eliminar la ciudadan\u00eda por nacimiento -garantizada por la Enmienda 14- plantea preguntas que van m\u00e1s all\u00e1 del \u00e1mbito legal. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u00bfSe trata de una discusi\u00f3n constitucional o de una redefinici\u00f3n de qui\u00e9n pertenece al pa\u00eds? Esa fue la premisa que marc\u00f3 el panel organizado por ACoM, donde expertos abordaron las consecuencias de una medida que podr\u00eda afectar a millones de personas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Se trata, pues, de un decreto de la Corte Suprema impulsado por el presidente Donald Trump, la cual busca restringir la ciudadan\u00eda autom\u00e1tica a hijos de inmigrantes indocumentados o con estatus temporal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Moderado por la periodista Sunita Sohrabji, el panel incluy\u00f3 al profesor de derecho Hiroshi Motomura (UCLA), el investigador Phillip Connor (Princeton), la dem\u00f3grafa Julia Gelatt (Migration Policy Institute) y Xiao Wang, CEO de Boundless Immigration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

M\u00e1s que una reforma legal: una redefinici\u00f3n del pa\u00eds<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Para Motomura, el debate no puede reducirse a una interpretaci\u00f3n jur\u00eddica. En una entrevista presentada durante el panel, el acad\u00e9mico sostuvo que la ciudadan\u00eda por nacimiento forma parte de una visi\u00f3n hist\u00f3rica de Estados Unidos como una naci\u00f3n inclusiva.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cEl tema fundamental es qu\u00e9 tipo de pa\u00eds es Estados Unidos\u201d, se\u00f1al\u00f3, al explicar que la Enmienda 14 no solo corrigi\u00f3 exclusiones hist\u00f3ricas -como el fallo Dred Scott-, sino que estableci\u00f3 una idea de pertenencia basada en el nacimiento y no en el origen familiar.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

En ese sentido, advirti\u00f3 que limitar este derecho implicar\u00eda un cambio profundo en la identidad del pa\u00eds, al excluir a personas que han nacido y crecido en territorio estadounidense, pero que podr\u00edan dejar de ser reconocidas como ciudadanas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Una poblaci\u00f3n sin estatus: efectos sociales y educativos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Uno de los efectos m\u00e1s reiterados durante el panel fue la creaci\u00f3n de una poblaci\u00f3n sin estatus legal. Julia Gelatt explic\u00f3 que, de eliminarse la ciudadan\u00eda por nacimiento, miles de ni\u00f1os comenzar\u00edan su vida en Estados Unidos sin reconocimiento legal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Seg\u00fan sus estimaciones, alrededor de 255.000 ni\u00f1os por a\u00f1o podr\u00edan nacer sin estatus, lo que, a largo plazo, incrementar\u00eda significativamente la poblaci\u00f3n inmigrante no autorizada.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Para la especialista, esto no solo tendr\u00eda consecuencias inmediatas -como la falta de acceso a programas p\u00fablicos-, sino tambi\u00e9n efectos estructurales. \u201cSe crear\u00eda una clase permanente de personas excluidas\u201d, advirti\u00f3, se\u00f1alando que estas limitaciones afectar\u00edan el acceso a educaci\u00f3n superior, empleo formal y estabilidad econ\u00f3mica.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Adem\u00e1s, enfatiz\u00f3 que estas restricciones podr\u00edan reducir las aspiraciones educativas de los j\u00f3venes, al saber que, incluso con estudios avanzados, no tendr\u00edan acceso a trabajos legales.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

El panel tambi\u00e9n abord\u00f3 c\u00f3mo la eliminaci\u00f3n de la ciudadan\u00eda por nacimiento podr\u00eda afectar el acceso a derechos b\u00e1sicos, como la educaci\u00f3n. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Se record\u00f3 el precedente del caso \u2018\u2018Plyler v. Doe\u2019\u2019 (1982), que garantiza el acceso a la educaci\u00f3n p\u00fablica para todos los ni\u00f1os, independientemente de su estatus migratorio. Sin embargo, algunos estados ya eval\u00faan medidas que podr\u00edan restringir este derecho, lo que abrir\u00eda la puerta a nuevos desaf\u00edos legales. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Los especialistas advirtieron que excluir a ni\u00f1os del sistema educativo no solo tendr\u00eda consecuencias individuales, sino tambi\u00e9n sociales. La falta de acceso a educaci\u00f3n podr\u00eda derivar en una poblaci\u00f3n menos preparada, con menor capacidad de inserci\u00f3n laboral y mayor vulnerabilidad.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Impacto econ\u00f3mico y p\u00e9rdida de talento<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

El an\u00e1lisis econ\u00f3mico presentado por Phillip Connor introdujo otra dimensi\u00f3n clave: el impacto a largo plazo en la econom\u00eda estadounidense.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A partir de datos censales, el investigador estim\u00f3 que millones de personas que hoy se benefician de la ciudadan\u00eda por nacimiento han contribuido significativamente al crecimiento econ\u00f3mico del pa\u00eds. En total, calcul\u00f3 que estas poblaciones han generado al menos 7,7 trillones de d\u00f3lares en ingresos a lo largo de un siglo. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Adem\u00e1s, proyect\u00f3 que, de mantenerse la pol\u00edtica actual, futuras generaciones podr\u00edan aportar al menos un trill\u00f3n adicional en las pr\u00f3ximas d\u00e9cadas. Sin embargo, advirti\u00f3 que eliminar este derecho implicar\u00eda una p\u00e9rdida considerable de trabajadores calificados.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cDos tercios de estos individuos acceden a ocupaciones que requieren educaci\u00f3n superior\u201d, explic\u00f3.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Adem\u00e1s, destac\u00f3 que la ciudadan\u00eda facilita el acceso a estudios universitarios y, por ende, a mejores oportunidades laborales.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Desde otra perspectiva, Xiao Wang subray\u00f3 que esta pol\u00edtica tambi\u00e9n afectar\u00eda la capacidad del pa\u00eds para atraer talento internacional. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cLas personas no solo eval\u00faan un salario o un trabajo, sino si pueden construir una vida estable para sus hijos\u201d, afirm\u00f3.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

En un contexto donde Estados Unidos podr\u00eda enfrentar una escasez de m\u00e1s de 86.000 m\u00e9dicos para 2036, la incertidumbre migratoria podr\u00eda desincentivar la llegada de profesionales, especialmente en sectores cr\u00edticos como la salud y en comunidades rurales.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Una decisi\u00f3n que puede redefinir vidas<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Una conclusi\u00f3n a la que llegaron los especialistas en el panel fue que la ciudadan\u00eda por nacimiento no puede limitarse a una discusi\u00f3n legal inmediata. Sus efectos se proyectan no solo en la econom\u00eda o en la pol\u00edtica, sino en la vida concreta de millones de familias migrantes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cuestionar este derecho, entonces, implica abrir la puerta a que miles de ni\u00f1os crezcan sin reconocimiento legal en el pa\u00eds donde nacieron. Este riesgo no es abstracto: se vincula directamente con el sistema de detenci\u00f3n migratoria de E.E.U.U., administrado por el Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), que ya enfrenta m\u00faltiples denuncias por abusos.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

En 2025, seg\u00fan reportes del diario The Guardian, al menos 32 personas murieron bajo custodia de la ICE, el n\u00famero m\u00e1s alto en dos d\u00e9cadas, en un contexto de hacinamiento, neglicencia m\u00e9dica y deterioro de las condiciones de detenci\u00f3n. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Para 2026, esta cifra sigue en aumento, con nuevas muertes registradas en los primeros meses del a\u00f1o. Las investigaciones y reportes tambi\u00e9n han documentado casos de aislamiento prolongado y abuso f\u00edsico.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Eliminar la ciudadan\u00eda por nacimiento no solo redefine qui\u00e9n pertenece al pa\u00eds, sino tambi\u00e9n qui\u00e9n queda expuesto a este sistema. M\u00e1s que una reforma legal, lo que est\u00e1 en juego es la posibilidad de ampliar una estructura de vulnerabilidad que impactar\u00eda, sobre todo, a quienes nacen en el margen.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In a panel organized by American Community Media (ACoM), legal, demographic, and immigration specialists examined the potential elimination of birthright citizenship, warning of economic, social, and generational consequences that could reshape the country\u2019s structure. As the issue returns to the forefront of the U.S. political agenda, the possibility of eliminating birthright citizenship -guaranteed by the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1880,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[686,194,9],"tags":[1257,1277,3152,196,1040,3151,696,130,2873,3153,86,3150],"class_list":["post-1879","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-american-community-media","category-california-black-media","category-ethnic-media-services","tag-acom","tag-american-community-media","tag-birthrightcitizenship","tag-california","tag-donald-trump","tag-humanrights","tag-ice","tag-immigration","tag-lavozcalifornia","tag-migration","tag-usa","tag-uspolicy"],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lavoz.us.com\/homepage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1879","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lavoz.us.com\/homepage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lavoz.us.com\/homepage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lavoz.us.com\/homepage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lavoz.us.com\/homepage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1879"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lavoz.us.com\/homepage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1879\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1881,"href":"https:\/\/lavoz.us.com\/homepage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1879\/revisions\/1881"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lavoz.us.com\/homepage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1880"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lavoz.us.com\/homepage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1879"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lavoz.us.com\/homepage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1879"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lavoz.us.com\/homepage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1879"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}