- Ending birthright citizenship could cost the U.S. $7.7 trillion in lost economic contributions over a century.
- California and Texas would face one-third of losses, totaling over $3.5 trillion between the two states.
- The unauthorized population is projected to increase by 5.4 million people over a 50-year period.
(UNITED STATES) – Princeton University’s Center for Migration and Development said ending birthright citizenship would cost the U.S. economy $7.7 trillion in lost economic contributions over a 100-year period from 1975 to 2074.
The estimate covers projected income contributions that would be lost from people born to undocumented or temporary immigrant parents during that period. It also includes about $1 trillion tied to future children not yet born who would contribute during their working lifetimes.
The research places a large share of that loss in two states. California and Texas would account for about one-third of the total effect, with California alone representing more than $2 trillion in lost contributions and Texas nearly $1.5 trillion.
The rest of the country would absorb the remaining two-thirds of the losses. The figures point to an economic effect that extends far beyond border states, even as the largest dollar totals cluster in the two biggest state economies.
Princeton’s researchers prepared the analysis in response to President Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship. The Supreme Court was expected to rule on the issue in June 2026.
The center’s estimate frames the debate in long time horizons rather than annual budget cycles. Instead of measuring a one-year change in revenue or spending, it tracks income contributions across generations, including children who would enter the workforce decades after the policy change.
That approach also captures a basic feature of birthright citizenship policy. The immediate legal change would apply at birth, but the full economic effect would unfold slowly, first through children born without legal status, then through a larger unauthorized population, and later through a smaller workforce and lower lifetime earnings contributions.
The research projects the unauthorized immigrant population would grow by 2.7 million over 20 years and by 5.4 million over 50 years. It also estimates that about 255,000 children per year would be born without legal status.
Those numbers describe a shift that compounds over time. Each year adds another cohort of children without legal status, and each cohort affects schools, employers, households and tax bases long after the year of birth has passed.
Researchers also projected labor market effects. The labor force would be short by 400,000 skilled workers, affecting industries such as construction and agriculture that already face workforce pressures.
The construction and agriculture references matter because both sectors rely on large numbers of workers across skill levels and across states. A labor shortfall in those industries would not be confined to one region, even if California and Texas carry the largest share of the total economic loss.
The analysis also says the policy would discourage highly-skilled global talent from immigrating to the United States. That finding extends the projected damage beyond families directly affected by the loss of automatic citizenship at birth.
A deterrent effect on highly-skilled immigration would change the debate from one focused narrowly on legal status to one focused on competitiveness. If global talent sees the United States as less stable or less welcoming for families, the cost would show up over time in the size and composition of the workforce.
Within the study’s state-by-state picture, California stands out with more than $2 trillion in lost contributions. Texas follows at nearly $1.5 trillion.
Together, those totals place roughly one-third of the national effect in two states that anchor large immigrant populations, major labor markets and broad tax bases. The remaining two-thirds would be spread across the rest of the country, showing that the projected losses are national even when concentrated geographically.
California and Texas also serve as a shorthand for the policy’s reach. One state is the country’s largest economy. The other sits at the center of border enforcement politics, fast population growth and labor demand in construction, logistics, agriculture and energy.
The $7.7 trillion estimate, measured over a century, gives policymakers a scale for comparing the legal and political arguments with long-run economic output. It also puts a price on what the researchers describe as lost contributions, not simply lost wages for one generation.
That distinction is central to the study’s design. The model counts the economic activity of people who would have been born in the United States and spent their working lives contributing income, and it adds the contributions of future children not yet born, valued at about $1 trillion.
Because the time frame runs from 1975 to 2074, the estimate spans people already born, people now in the labor force and people who have not yet entered the workforce. It is a cumulative measure, not a snapshot.
The demographic projections sharpen that cumulative picture. An increase of 2.7 million in the unauthorized immigrant population over 20 years and 5.4 million over 50 years would change the size of the population living without legal status, while about 255,000 children each year would begin life outside the legal protections attached to citizenship.
That would leave lawmakers confronting several pressures at once: a larger unauthorized population, a smaller supply of skilled workers, and lower projected lifetime income contributions. Public services and tax bases would feel those effects over decades rather than all at once.
The state concentration in California and Texas also points to uneven fiscal pressure. California’s loss of more than $2 trillion and Texas’s loss of nearly $1.5 trillion would place the heaviest dollar effects on two states that already occupy the center of immigration and labor debates.
Even so, the researchers did not confine the impact to those two states. Most of the losses, about two-thirds, would fall elsewhere across the country, reflecting the spread of immigrant households and labor demand well beyond the Southwest.
The legal dispute arrives with the Supreme Court expected to rule in June 2026 on President Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship. Princeton’s analysis gives that pending decision an economic dimension measured not in campaign rhetoric or annual appropriations, but in a century of projected lost contributions totaling $7.7 trillion.
