Trump's ex- wife Ivana wasn't an American citizen until 1988. She gave birth to Don Jr in 1977, Ivanka in 1981, & Eric in 1984.- Let's cancel their birthright citizen ship first.
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Ivana Trump did not become a U.S. citizen until 1988, after the births of Donald Jr. , Ivanka and Eric [1]. Multiple fact-checkers and legal explainers say those three children are U.S. citizens regardless — they were born in the United States and their father, Donald Trump, was a U.S. citizen at the time — so proposals to end “birthright” jus soli would not retroactively strip their citizenship under current law and precedent [2] [3] [4].
1. The factual core: Ivana’s naturalization date and the children’s birth years
Ivana Trump became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 1988; Donald Jr., Ivanka and Eric were born in 1977, 1981 and 1984 respectively [1]. News archives and contemporary reports document Ivana’s 1988 swearing-in [5]. Fact-checkers repeatedly flagged the timeline when social posts suggested hypocrisy if birthright citizenship were curtailed [2] [6].
2. Why social posts claim the children would lose citizenship
The social-media argument hinges on two ideas: (a) that Ivana was not a citizen when the three older Trumps were born, and (b) a vague reading of proposals to end “birthright” citizenship that assume parentage would determine status. That combination fuels the claim that those children “only” became citizens by virtue of place of birth — and thus would be vulnerable under a new rule [7] [4].
3. Legal reality under current law and precedent
Under the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause and long-established Supreme Court precedent, anyone born on U.S. soil and “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States is a citizen, regardless of parental citizenship — with narrow historic exceptions like foreign diplomats [8] [9]. Fact-checkers and legal analysts point out that the Trump children were born in New York and thus meet that standard [3] [10].
4. Citizenship transmitted by a citizen parent (if birth were abroad)
Separate rules apply to children born outside the United States: U.S. citizenship can be transmitted at birth through a U.S. citizen parent if statutory residency and legitimacy requirements are met. FactCheck.org notes that even under those rules, Donald Trump’s status and residence would have satisfied transmission requirements had those births occurred abroad [4] [11].
5. Why ending birthright citizenship is legally fraught
Experts say that fully removing jus soli in practice would require either a constitutional amendment or a radical reinterpretation by the Supreme Court. The Brennan Center and the American Immigration Council say the only straightforward legal route to end broad birthplace-based citizenship is to amend the 14th Amendment; attempts via executive order are likely to prompt immediate litigation [12] [13]. Courts have relied on United States v. Wong Kim Ark and related doctrine to protect birthplace citizenship [12] [9].
6. Retroactivity and existing citizens
Mainstream fact-checkers stress that proposals discussed by political figures have not targeted existing, already-established citizens, and legal scholars note that trying to strip citizenship retroactively would raise separate constitutional and statutory problems not addressed by those claims [2] [12]. Reuters and AFP both reported that Trump’s stated plan would not affect his children because they already meet current citizenship criteria [3] [10].
7. Competing viewpoints and political context
Some advocates for restricting birthright citizenship argue that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” can be read narrowly, and that modern litigation could change precedent — a position embraced by political actors seeking policy change [13] [12]. Conversely, civil-rights groups, immigration scholars and many legal commentators treat the 14th Amendment and Wong Kim Ark as settled law and see executive or statutory attempts as constitutionally vulnerable [12] [14].
8. What the available sources do not address
Available sources do not mention any specific, successful legal mechanism that has stripped U.S.-born, already-documented citizens of citizenship on the basis described in social posts; they do not show a court ruling that would permit retroactive removal of citizenship from the Trump children (not found in current reporting). They also do not document any immediate administrative plan that would practically “cancel” the citizenship of people already recognized as U.S. citizens under existing law (not found in current reporting).
9. Bottom line for the original query
Ivana’s 1988 naturalization is a verifiable fact and the basis for the social-media claim [1]. But established constitutional text, Supreme Court precedent and multiple independent fact-checkers conclude that Donald Jr., Ivanka and Eric are U.S. citizens by birth in the United States and would not be stripped of citizenship under current law; meaningful removal of jus soli would require amendment or a dramatic judicial reversal that sources say is unlikely without protracted litigation [2] [3] [12].