What is the Born in America Act and who proposed it?

1. What the bill says and what it tries to stop

Congressional text for versions titled the Born in the USA Act appears on Congress.gov (H.R.3368 in the House and S.646 in the Senate) and frames its purpose around preventing federal agencies from following policies that would narrow birthright citizenship; the bill’s text references Executive Order 14160 and seeks to prohibit federal funds from being used to implement that order or any successor regulation ^{[1] [2]}. The legislative language and accompanying press materials portray the measure as the congressional countermeasure to an administration action which the White House described as clarifying categories of persons not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the Fourteenth Amendment ^{[4] [2]}.

2. Who proposed and led the push in Congress

The House effort behind the Born in the USA Act is publicly linked to Representative Delia Ramirez and a coalition including Hispanic Caucus Chair Adriano Espaillat, Asian Pacific American Caucus Chair Grace Meng, Black Caucus Chair Yvette Clarke, and House Judiciary Ranking Member Jamie Raskin, among others; Rep. Grace Meng is quoted as co-introducer and public lead in a Ramirez press release defending birthright citizenship ^[3]. The congressional record on Congress.gov lists bill numbers for versions of the proposal, indicating formal introduction in the 119th Congress ^{[1] [2]}.

3. The executive order that prompted the bill

President Trump signed an executive order on January 21, 2025 titled "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship," which asserted that certain categories of U.S.-born children—such as those born to unlawfully present parents or to parents temporarily in the United States—do not automatically acquire citizenship, and the order sought to direct agencies to act accordingly ^[4]. The Born in the USA Act, as described by sponsors, is intended to block federal agencies from implementing that order and to prevent taxpayer funds from being used to carry it out ^{[2] [3]}.

4. Confusion, misinformation, and adjacent false claims

Public discussion produced a tangle of names and falsehoods: social posts and later viral claims referenced a "Born in America Act" allegedly authored by Sen. John Kennedy and purported to have passed and forced resignations of naturalized officeholders—claims debunked by fact-checkers, which found no such bill and identified instead the real Born in the USA Act introduced by House Democrats in 2025 ^{[5] [6]}. Media fact-checkers explicitly searched Congress.gov and found no record supporting the viral "Born in America Act" narrative, cautioning that the similar-sounding Born in the USA Act is a different, defensive piece of legislation opposed to the administration’s executive move ^{[5] [6]}.

5. Constitutional and legal stakes cited by proponents and opponents

Sponsors of the Born in the USA Act anchor their argument in the Fourteenth Amendment and Supreme Court precedent such as United States v. Wong Kim Ark, arguing that birthright citizenship is constitutionally protected and that the executive order overreaches ^{[3] [2]}. The White House order explicitly disputes the universality of jus soli in some cases and cites historical readings of "subject to the jurisdiction" to justify its policy change, a contested legal posture that proponents of the bill say courts have already weighed against in multiple rulings ^{[4] [2]}.

6. What reporting does not settle

Congress.gov confirms versions of a Born in the USA Act and a contemporaneous executive order; press releases identify Democratic House leaders as sponsors, and fact-checkers trace viral misreports to different, non-existent bills ^{[1] [2] [3] [5]}. However, available reporting in these sources does not provide a complete legislative history—such as committee action, floor votes, or final disposition—so the bill’s ultimate fate in Congress cannot be asserted from these sources alone ^{[1] [2]}.