Related videos:
After the judicial setback on Tuesday before the Supreme Court, the Trump administration is considering banning entry to foreign pregnant women as part of an offensive against what is known as “birth tourism”, a phenomenon that the government describes as a “growing industry” and that has now become the new front in its immigration policy.
The highest court rejected Executive Order 14,160, signed by Trump on the first day of his second term, by a vote of six to three, which aimed to deny automatic citizenship to the children of parents without regular immigration status.
The ruling on birthright citizenship represents Trump's third significant legal defeat before the Supreme Court in recent months.
The government's response: Tighten visas and controls
The acting attorney general Todd Blanche outlined the new direction before reporters:
"From the perspective of the Department of Justice, we are clearly focusing our prosecutors and law enforcement partners on birth tourism, which is a booming industry that will continue to grow."
Blanche also anticipated actions in the visa process:
"There are other things that the federal government can do in the visa process and the application process to minimize or limit the opportunity for people to come here just to have their baby and then have that child become a U.S. citizen."
The State Department has already revoked hundreds of visas for individuals allegedly linked to birth tourism networks, including the dismantling of a network in West Africa involving over 100 foreigners with fraudulent documents and the identification of more than 400 suspicious cases in Europe since 2024.
Can Trump act without Congress?
Specialized lawyers confirm that the denial of entry to pregnant women is already happening in practice.
The immigration attorney Emily Benítez explained:
"It is possible. In fact, there have already been cases where, exercising their discretion, authorities consider that a person is traveling solely for the purpose of giving birth in the United States. In those cases, officers may deny entry, return the individual to their country, and even cancel their visa."
The constitutional lawyer Joseph Malouf agreed that the president has broad immigration discretion, but warned that a general prohibition has its limits:
"That would require legislation from Congress. It cannot be done through an executive order. A law approved by Congress would be necessary, and there would also be limits on what the government can do because the Constitution grants certain protections."
Trump demands Congress to take action
Trump reacted to the ruling on Truth Social by combining frustration and sarcasm: “The Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship, which is a shame for our country, but we can easily offset it in Congress through legislation.”
Legal experts warn that amending the Fourteenth Amendment would require a constitutional reform and 60 votes in the Senate, a threshold that is difficult to reach even with Congress under Republican control.
The extreme of the debate: A MAGA ally calls for sterilizing foreigners
Sean Davis, CEO of The Federalist and a figure aligned with the MAGA movement, posted on social media a seven-point plan that included "banning the entry of all foreign women who are pregnant," and "requiring the sterilization of all foreign visitors before entering the country," even going so far as to propose the "dissolution of the Union."
The reactions were of widespread indignation.
David French, columnist for The New York Times, was blunt: "This list is sheer madness."
Political journalist Isaac Saul added: "They have the White House, the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the Supreme Court, and still it's not enough for them. It's completely crazy."
The data contradicts the magnitude of the problem
Beyond rhetoric, the numbers clarify the true extent of the phenomenon.
According to the Pew Research Center, 9% of the babies born in the United States in 2023 were children of undocumented mothers or mothers with temporary legal status, but that figure does not imply that these women traveled to the country solely to give birth.
Birth tourism, in the strictest sense, is statistically marginal: between 2016 and 2024, only 80,500 cases were recorded, which is 0.24% of the total births during that period, a proportion that contrasts with the centrality that the administration assigns it in its immigration discourse.
Filed under: