What laws or bills have been proposed in Congress to restrict jus soli since 2000?
Executive summary
Since 1991 and especially since 2019, members of Congress have repeatedly introduced bills to restrict jus soli (birthright citizenship); prominent recent proposals include H.R.4864 (End Birthright Citizenship Fraud Act, 2023) and multiple “Birthright Citizenship Act” bills and variants culminating in H.R.569/H.R.6612 (House) and S.304/S.5223/S.5223 variants (Senate) across 2023–2025 that would limit automatic citizenship to children with at least one qualifying parent such as a U.S. citizen, lawful permanent resident, or service member [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. Civil‑rights and Justice Department analyses argue such legislative changes would conflict with established readings of the Fourteenth Amendment and Supreme Court precedent [6] [1] [7].
1. A long-running congressional campaign, now concentrated in the 2020s
Efforts to curtail jus soli date back decades in Congress; reporting and advocacy groups map continuous introductions since at least 1991, and Republican lawmakers have reintroduced bills repeatedly in subsequent Congresses [8] [9]. The sustained campaign has intensified in the 2019–2025 period, producing specific bills that would amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to redefine who is “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States [3] [2].
2. What the bills would do in plain terms
The most concrete, recent proposals (labeled “Birthright Citizenship Act” or similar) would amend federal statute to deny automatic U.S. citizenship at birth to children whose parents are not U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, or qualifying service members — replacing near‑universal jus soli with a parent‑status test [4] [5] [2] [3]. Sponsors argue the change would close “birth tourism” and chain migration, and restore the original meaning of the Citizenship Clause, per their statements [10] [11].
3. Key bills and legislative instances (selected, post‑2000)
- H.R.4864, the End Birthright Citizenship Fraud Act (118th Congress, 2023), sought to limit automatic citizenship by enforcing a narrower reading of “subject to the jurisdiction” [2] [12].
- H.R.6612 (118th Congress, 2023) and S.5223 (118th) were named Birthright Citizenship Act bills that proposed similar statutory clarifications to section 301 of the INA [3] [13].
- In the 119th Congress , the Birthright Citizenship Act appeared as H.R.569 and S.304 (and related filings), again proposing to restrict birthright citizenship to children with at least one qualifying parent [4] [5] [14]. These measures drew sponsorship and co‑sponsorship from multiple Republican House and Senate members [10] [11].
4. Legal context and counterarguments from government and scholars
The Department of Justice and constitutional scholars have warned that legislation denying citizenship at birth would conflict with the Fourteenth Amendment and decades of precedent such as Wong Kim Ark; DOJ and house Judiciary materials say Congress lacks authority to abrogate the Amendment’s guarantee and that such legislation is “unquestionably unconstitutional” [6] [1] [7]. Advocacy groups including the American Immigration Council and civil‑rights organizations likewise argue that codifying restrictions would violate settled law and create massive legal uncertainty [15] [7].
5. Political framing and motives on both sides
Sponsors frame the bills as immigration‑control measures targeting “birth tourism” and the alleged magnet of unconditional jus soli; press releases from senators and House members emphasize security and fairness [10] [11]. Opponents frame the push as an erosion of a core Reconstruction‑era protection that historically extended jus soli as part of the Fourteenth Amendment; they warn of arbitrary lines and harmed children [7] [16].
6. Scale, consequences, and unanswered practical questions
Analysts have estimated massive impacts if statutes or court rulings ended unconditional jus soli (for example, earlier think‑tank estimates projected millions could be affected if birthright were removed), and critics note practical problems such as proving parents’ status at birth and creating a two‑tier cohort of children born before/after any statutory cut‑off [17] [16] [18]. Available sources do not provide a definitive vote tally or enactment history for these bills in Congress; they document introductions, sponsorships, and advocacy responses but not final legislative success [2] [5].
7. Bottom line and how to read current reporting
Members of Congress have repeatedly proposed to restrict jus soli since 1991, with a concentrated wave of statutory proposals in the 2020s exemplified by H.R.4864 , H.R.6612 , S.5223 , and the Birthright Citizenship Act filings in 2025 (H.R.569/S.304) [2] [3] [13] [4]. Supporters present immigration‑control rationales; legal authorities and civil‑rights sources counter that statute‑level changes would conflict with the Fourteenth Amendment and established precedent [1] [7] [6]. Readers should weigh sponsors’ policy claims against constitutional analyses in DOJ, judicial precedent, and civil‑rights commentary cited above [1] [6] [7].