Sen. Rand Paul on Thursday said he will push a constitutional amendment to end birthright citizenship, arguing courts have been reading the 14th Amendment the wrong way. His move lands just weeks after the Supreme Court heard April 1 oral arguments in a separate case that could reshape who is guaranteed U.S. citizenship at birth.
Paul’s announcement and what he said
Paul took to X to declare, “I am introducing a Constitutional Amendment to end Birthright Citizenship,” arguing that current interpretations give automatic U.S. citizenship to children born in the country regardless of their parents’ status. As reported by WTTE, he said he wants to ensure that only children born to legal U.S. residents receive citizenship at birth and pointed back to his role in cosponsoring the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2011. Just The News also noted that Paul cast his amendment as a fallback plan if the courts do not resolve the issue in a way he supports, and the congressional record reflects his 2011 co-sponsorship.
What the 14th Amendment and precedent say
At the center of the legal fight is the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment and the five-word phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” which scholars and judges have dissected for generations. The National Archives provides the amendment’s text, while experts at the Brennan Center point out that federal statutes and Supreme Court precedent have long supported a broad rule of birthright citizenship, even as current lawsuits probe the limits of that interpretation.
Where the courts stand
The Supreme Court’s April 1 argument centered on a legal challenge to President Trump’s executive order that sought to narrow birthright citizenship. Several justices pressed pointed questions about whether the executive branch can trim back the long-standing rule. Coverage from SCOTUSblog and reporting by the AP highlighted how the justices’ questions could decide whether the executive branch gets any real say in reshaping birthright citizenship doctrine.
How hard it would be to change the Constitution
Even if Paul’s amendment is formally introduced, it faces a brutal climb. Article V of the Constitution requires two-thirds support in both the House and Senate and ratification by three-quarters of the states. The Library of Congress’s Constitution Annotated lays out those proposal and ratification routes and notes that successfully adding an amendment is historically rare.
Political stakes and next steps
Paul has framed his proposal as a legal hedge in case the courts do not interpret the 14th Amendment as he hopes. Lawmakers familiar with Article V’s sky-high thresholds, however, say the odds of actually ratifying such an amendment are extremely long. Outlets that picked up Paul’s post have portrayed the move as both a signal to the GOP base and a warning shot that some in Congress are prepared to press the issue if the Supreme Court issues a narrower ruling this term - a decision analysts expect could land before the Court’s term wraps up this summer.
.jpg){kind=link}