Birth Certificate No Longer Proves U.S. Citizenship Under EO

(TEXAS) A sweeping shift in how the United States 🇺🇸 treats birthright citizenship has begun in parts of the country, after a June 2025 Supreme Court ruling lifted a nationwide block on President Trump’s executive order and allowed implementation to proceed in 28 states, including Texas. As of September 16, 2025, the order remains under multiple federal court injunctions elsewhere, leaving a patchwork system where a state-issued birth certificate no longer guarantees federal recognition of citizenship for some children born after February 19, 2025.

What the executive order does and where it applies

Under the executive order, certain children born on U.S. soil are denied federal citizenship recognition if their parents do not meet specified immigration-status requirements. The Supreme Court allowed implementation to begin 30 days after its June ruling in states not actively challenging the order, while explicitly saying it did not decide the constitutional merits of birthright citizenship.

• In states with ongoing lawsuits (including New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and cases before a federal appeals court in San Francisco), injunctions continue to block enforcement.
• In implementing states, the order is in effect and federal agencies are following the new guidance.

Who is directly affected

The order specifically targets two groups of newborns:

1. Children born to mothers who are “unlawfully present” in the United States when the father is neither a U.S. citizen nor a lawful permanent resident.
2. Children born to mothers with “lawful but temporary” status—examples include:
   • Students
   • Temporary workers
   • Tourists and Visa Waiver entrants
   • TPS holders
   • Humanitarian parole recipients
   • Asylum applicants with pending cases
   • U- or T-visa applicants

For these families, state birth certificates continue to be issued as usual, but federal agencies are instructed not to treat those documents as proof of citizenship.

Federal agency actions required by the order

The executive order instructs federal agencies to take several specific actions:

• The U.S. State Department is told not to issue passports to affected children.
• The Social Security Administration is barred from issuing Social Security numbers to these children.
• Agencies must reject state-issued birth certificates as sufficient proof of citizenship for affected newborns.
• Agencies were ordered to develop guidance within 30 days of the order’s release.

During Supreme Court arguments, U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer acknowledged probable practical confusion, saying federal officials would “have to figure that out essentially” and that “agencies were never given the opportunity to formulate the guidance.”

Practical consequences — documents and daily life

According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, the result is a two-track system that can render the birth certificate “virtually useless” for federal purposes in many cases. Parents now face new demands to prove the immigration status of at least one parent at the time of birth to secure federal recognition of their child’s citizenship. For many families, assembling this proof will be difficult because the rules are unclear.

• Parents may be denied:
  • U.S. passports (first-passport applications for minors use Form DS-11)
  • Social Security numbers (applications use Form SS-5)
• The State Department’s passport forms page: U.S. Passports: Forms
• SSA’s application: Application for a Social Security Card (Form SS-5)

Hospitals, schools, and county offices are already experiencing confusion as frontline workers confront unclear federal instructions.

Healthcare, benefits, and long-term impacts

Loss of federal citizenship recognition can have immediate and long-term consequences:

• Children may be ineligible for programs such as CHIP, SNAP, and Medicaid, threatening infant care, vaccinations, and family stability.
• Without a Social Security number, routine tasks—adding a newborn to a health plan, claiming tax credits—become harder.
• Long-term restrictions could include limits on:
  • Voting
  • Jury service
  • Certain government or security-sensitive jobs
  • Other opportunities unless the individual later obtains lawful immigration status

Local reactions and operational confusion

Local officials and administrators have raised alarms about the lack of clear federal guidance.

• Republican county judges, including Ector County’s Dustin Fawcett, have expressed concern about the operational pressure on hospitals and county offices.
• In some school districts, fear and confusion have prompted policies asking families to register immigration status, even though students have a right to attend public school.

Legal challenges and constitutional debate

Civil rights and immigration groups have immediately filed lawsuits, arguing the order violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. Key legal context:

• The Fourteenth Amendment (1868) states that all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, are citizens.
• In United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), the Supreme Court affirmed birthright citizenship broadly for children born in the U.S., with very narrow exceptions.
• Lawsuits seek to restore that longstanding rule nationwide and permanently block the order.

Supporters of the order argue that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” permits limits on birthright citizenship. Opponents counter that the Supreme Court has already interpreted the Amendment to cover nearly all children born in the U.S. and that any statutory change should come from Congress, not an executive order.

• The Supreme Court is expected to take up the core constitutional issue in its next term beginning October 2025.

State-by-state reality: a patchwork system

Implementation differs by state:

• In Texas, hospitals can issue birth certificates as usual, but parents in the categories defined by the order may find those certificates do not suffice for federal agencies.
• In states under injunctions, families may continue to obtain federal recognition of citizenship for newborns until courts decide otherwise.

Practical advice for impacted parents (implementing states)

Steps parents should take to prepare and protect their children’s records:

1. Keep detailed records of each parent’s status at the time of birth, for example:
   • Permanent resident card (green card)
   • Naturalization certificate
   • Passport showing U.S. citizenship
2. Gather evidence that shows timelines clearly (entry/exit stamps, visa documents, employment authorization, etc.).
3. Expect federal offices to:
   • Request additional documents
   • Take longer to process applications
   • Deny more claims when documentary proof is lacking
4. Seek local support:
   • Community clinics
   • Legal aid organizations
   • School district liaisons for non-federal assistance while litigation proceeds

Where to read the legal text and background

For verification of constitutional text and historical notes:

• The Fourteenth Amendment official text and notes: Constitution Annotated: Fourteenth Amendment

Although the Supreme Court’s June ruling lifted a nationwide block on implementation, it did not decide whether the executive order is lawful under the Fourteenth Amendment — so the central constitutional question remains unresolved.

The stakes are enormous: the executive order attempts a sharp break with over a century of practice, while injunctions preserve the traditional rule in other jurisdictions. Until the Supreme Court rules on the merits, millions of parents, doctors, and state officials will live with uncertainty about one of the most basic questions in American life: who is a citizen at birth?