What is the text and main provisions of the Born in America Act?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The “Born in the USA Act” most commonly refers to H.R.3368 (and companion S.646) introduced in the 119th Congress as a direct rebuke to President Trump’s Executive Order 14160; its core provision is a prohibition on federal funds being used to implement that executive order, and the bill’s text explicitly states birthright citizenship remains protected by the 14th Amendment and existing federal law (8 U.S.C. 1401) [1] [2] [3]. Separate but related legislation and proposals — chiefly the “Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025” (H.R.569 / S.304) — would change who is “subject to the jurisdiction” at birth and limit automatic citizenship for many U.S.-born children; that is a different bill with far broader effects [4] [5] [6].
1. What the Born in the USA Act (H.R.3368) actually says — a narrow, defensive law
H.R.3368, titled the Born in the USA Act of 2025, is focused narrowly on blocking implementation of Executive Order 14160, “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” by prohibiting Federal funds from being appropriated or otherwise made available to carry out that order or any successor guidance, regulation, or policy [2] [1]. The bill’s text frames the executive order as “flagrantly and clearly unconstitutional” and states that birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment and codified in 8 U.S.C. 1401, saying it cannot be rescinded by executive order or an Act of Congress [1] [2].
2. How this fits with the White House executive order it targets
President Trump’s Executive Order 14160, issued Jan. 20, 2025, attempted to narrow which U.S.-born children would receive citizenship, directing agencies to issue guidance and defining terms such as “mother” and “father” for implementation; it said changes take effect after a set date and sought to limit birthright citizenship for children of certain immigrants [7] [8]. The Born in the USA Act seeks only to deny funds to implement that order rather than to rewrite the citizenship rules itself [2] [1].
3. Different bills with different goals — don’t conflate names
A separate set of proposals called the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025 (introduced by Sen. Lindsey Graham and Rep. Brian Babin as S.304 / H.R.569) would alter the statute that governs who is “subject to the jurisdiction” at birth so that citizenship at birth would only attach when a parent is a U.S. citizen, a lawful permanent resident residing in the U.S., or a person in lawful immigration status doing active military service — effectively ending broad jus soli for many children born here [4] [5] [6]. Advocacy groups and legal commentators treat those bills as substantively different from H.R.3368: one is defensive (block funding), the other seeks to change who becomes a citizen at birth [4] [5].
4. Legal context and competing views on constitutionality
The H.R.3368 sponsors and supporting texts invoke the 14th Amendment and 8 U.S.C. 1401 to argue birthright citizenship cannot be undone by executive order or simple statute [1] [2]. Legal scholarship and civil‑rights groups point to longstanding Supreme Court precedent (United States v. Wong Kim Ark) and Brennan Center summaries that the 14th Amendment has long been understood to grant citizenship to nearly everyone born on U.S. soil, with limited exceptions [9]. The administration’s executive order prompted litigation and preliminary injunctions; federal courts have blocked aspects of the order in at least one case and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the dispute in Barbara v. Trump [10] [8].
5. What the public debate and misinformation look like
Media and fact‑checkers have flagged confusion and false claims circulating about “Born in America” or similarly named measures. For example, a viral claim that a Senate bill forced all federal officeholders to be “natural‑born” citizens and immediately stripped naturalized officials was debunked as inaccurate and conflating separate proposals [11]. GovTrack and Congress.gov entries make clear H.R.3368’s stated aim is only to prohibit funding for the executive order [3] [2].
6. Bottom line for readers: narrow law vs. sweeping rewrite
Available sources show H.R.3368 (Born in the USA Act) is a narrow funding prohibition aimed at blocking Executive Order 14160 and asserts the 14th Amendment and 8 U.S.C. 1401 protect birthright citizenship [2] [1]. Proposals labeled “Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025” (H.R.569 / S.304) would make a sweeping statutory change to limit automatic citizenship, and should not be conflated with H.R.3368 [4] [5]. The legal fight over the executive order will be resolved in courts — including the Supreme Court — and litigation outcomes, not H.R.3368, will determine immediate enforceability [10] [8].
Limitations: this summary uses the legislative texts and contemporary reporting in the provided sources; available sources do not mention subsequent congressional action or final votes beyond the introduced texts and accompanying coverage [2] [3].