What is the current status of the Born in America bill in Congress as of December 2025?
Executive summary
As of December 2025, multiple bills addressing birthright citizenship are active in the 119th Congress: the “Born in the USA Act” (H.R.3368/S.646) was introduced to prohibit funding of Executive Order 14160 and remains at early stages after introduction (H.R.3368 introduced May 13, 2025) [1] [2] [3]. Competing measures seek to curtail birthright citizenship (e.g., Birthright Citizenship Act H.R.569 / S.304 and related Constitutional Citizenship Clarification bills) and a raft of fact-checking coverage has debunked viral claims that a “Born in America” constitutional rewrite passed or immediately forced officials from office [4] [5] [6] [7].
1. What Congress actually has on the table: legislation, not a constitutional rewrite
Congressional records show several distinct bills: the Born in the USA Act (H.R.3368 in the House and S.646 in the Senate) is framed to bar federal funds from implementing Executive Order 14160 [1] [3]; separate proposals such as the Birthright Citizenship Act (H.R.569 / S.304) and the Constitutional Citizenship Clarification Act (H.R.4741) aim to narrow who is “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and thereby limit birthright citizenship [4] [5] [6].
2. Procedural posture: introduced and in early stages, not enacted
GovTrack and Congress.gov entries indicate H.R.3368 was introduced May 13, 2025, and remains in the early stages of the legislative process; there is no source in the provided reporting that says any of these bills have passed both chambers or been signed into law [2] [1] [3]. Available sources do not mention any enacted statute titled “Born in America Act” or any congressional action that would immediately remove sitting officeholders from office [7].
3. Political alignments and sponsorships — dueling agendas
The Born in the USA Act has Democratic sponsors emphasizing protection of constitutional birthright citizenship and preventing an executive order from changing long-standing practice (Rep. Delia Ramirez and a coalition of 109 members are publicly associated with the bill) [8]. By contrast, Republican-sponsored measures such as the Birthright Citizenship Act led by Sen. Lindsey Graham and Rep. Brian Babin explicitly seek to restrict jus soli citizenship and reinterpret who is “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. [9] [4]. These opposing objectives reflect a clear partisan divide: one package protects existing 14th Amendment interpretations, the other attempts statutory redefinition that supporters frame as “clarification” [9] [6].
4. Viral claims vs. documented reality: fact-checking failures
Multiple fact-checks and news analyses have debunked viral narratives that a “Born in America Act” passed and instantly disqualified members of Congress. Snopes and other reporting found no record of a bill by that name passing Congress and noted the absence of any mass resignations or forced removals described online; they identified the Born in the USA Act as a different, narrower bill aimed at blocking an executive order, not amending constitutional eligibility rules [7] [10]. Sensational accounts from partisan blogs that claim immediate disqualifications or billion-post social metrics are contradicted by congressional records and mainstream fact-checks [11] [12] [13] [10].
5. Legal and practical implications if measures advanced
If statutory measures that narrow birthright citizenship were to pass, they would likely trigger significant legal challenges because they seek to alter long-standing interpretations of the 14th Amendment and Supreme Court precedent [9]. Conversely, the Born in the USA Act’s stated purpose — to deny funding for an executive order — is a narrower, immediately judicially contestable posture that Congress can address through appropriations language [1] [3]. Available sources do not report court rulings resolving the constitutionality of those statutory proposals as of December 2025 [9].
6. How to read the noise: distinguishing bills, executive actions, and rumors
The record shows three separate currents: executive action (Executive Order 14160) that some members seek to block via appropriations or statute [1]; congressional bills to restrict birthright citizenship by redefining jurisdiction or nationality at birth (H.R.569/S.304, H.R.4741) [4] [5] [6]; and viral misinformation conflating proposals, inventing immediate effects, or misnaming bills [7] [10]. Readers should consult primary sources like Congress.gov for bill text and status and treat sensational secondary items (IFEG-style blogs) with skepticism because they mix accurate bill titles with fictional outcomes [3] [11] [12].
Limitations: This report is limited to the documents and fact-checking items supplied; if you want the absolute latest floor actions, roll-call votes, committee reports, or judicial rulings after these sources, those are not contained in the materials provided and are not reported here (not found in current reporting).