Posted on 07/13/2026 9:13:55 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The Supreme Court dealt a setback to President Trump at the end of June when they ruled that so-called “birthright citizenship” was enshrined by the 14th Amendment and that children born in the United States to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present are citizens at birth under the 14th Amendment.
The Court, in Trump v. Barbara, rejected Trump’s executive order banning the practice 6-3, although only five justices held that the order violated the 14th Amendment. Justice Brett Kavanaugh supplied the sixth vote on narrower statutory grounds.
As we’ve written, the Department of Justice immediately launched a crackdown on birth tourism, where scammers sneak into the country or overstay their visas to make sure their babies are born here and win the prize of citizenship for their offspring.
Now, Sen. Jim Banks (R-IN) is taking a page from SCOTUS Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s playbook and introducing legislation that attempts to capitalize on Kavanaugh’s separate — and noncontrolling — view that Congress may create additional exceptions by statute:
Sen. Jim Banks will introduce legislation Monday aimed at ending birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants and birth tourists by defining them as children of "invaders" under federal law after a Supreme Court ruling last month dealt a setback to President Donald Trump’s executive order on the issue.
Trump recently urged Senate Republicans to move faster on his legislative agenda, including ending birthright citizenship, telling them they were "not fighting hard enough," Banks, R-Ind., recalled in a June 30 interview with Human Events.
Banks told Fox News Digital he plans to introduce the Citizenship Act as soon as the Senate opens for business Monday afternoon – crafting it with a nod to Trump-appointed Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s concurrence in last month's Trump v. Barbara case.
👀That was fast. @SenatorBanks read Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence in the Birthright Citizenship case closely. The Supreme Court's Wong Kim Ark said 3 categories of people don't get citizenship. One is children of invaders. So he's introducing a law labeling illegals invaders pic.twitter.com/zXUizLqG8K— Eric W. (@EWess92) July 13, 2026
MORE: It's Not Over: DOJ Launches Major Crackdown After Supreme Court's Birthright Citizenship Ruling
Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship, Strikes Down Trump Executive Order in 5-4 Vote
Banks had previously previewed his move in a social media post by highlighting his priorities, including passing the SAVE America Act, which would require proof of citizenship to vote and photo ID to submit a ballot:
Last week's Supreme Court decision on birthright citizenship highlights the need for 4 important next steps:
1 – Deport every illegal alien out of America
2 – Maintain the Supreme Court majority
3 – Pass the SAVE America Act
4 – Pass a bill to ban birthright citizenship… pic.twitter.com/VlCZQs8Q2N— Senator Jim Banks (@SenatorBanks) July 11, 2026
Kavanaugh, who voted with the majority to strike down Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship but dissented on whether the order violated the Constitution/14th Amendment, offered Banks a possible statutory theory — though not one adopted by the Court. While Kavanaugh concluded that Congress could amend federal law to create additional exceptions to birthright citizenship, the five-justice majority held that the 14th Amendment itself guarantees citizenship to children born here to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present. Banks’ bill would therefore tee up a fresh constitutional fight rather than neatly sidestep the Court’s ruling.
Kavanaugh, concurring in the judgment and dissenting in part, said Trump’s order conflicted with federal birthright citizenship law but suggested Congress could amend that statute to create new exceptions.
In its summary, Banks' bill declares "any person who enters the United States without authorization or for the purpose of engaging in birth tourism is considered an invader..." and amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to exclude children of such "invaders."
Banks' key use of "invaders" cites Trump’s executive order declaring illegal immigration across the southern border an "invasion," while the bill notes the Barbara decision leaves that avenue open for Congress to crack down on.
The law would codify Trump’s declaration of "invasion" and potentially block birthright citizenship being automatically handed out to children of illegal immigrants.
The Supreme Court’s decision was a blow to Trump’s agenda, but it was a battle, not the end of the war. Thanks to Kavanaugh, a solution to one of the Left’s endless efforts to make a mockery out of our immigration system could be in sight. Whether Banks has found a viable workaround or simply set up the next Supreme Court fight remains to be seen.
Expect Thune to table it forever.
Thune will kill it. Thune kills everything we need. Why?
Sadly, yes. They don’t have the guts to do it. Even though it is a Congressional power under Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 and Section 5 of the 14th Amendment.
Even if Kavanaugh gave a map where he thinks it could work, there are still 5 Justices who will say the 14th Amendment provisions on birth citizenship are a Constitutional protection that cannot be removed through legislation.
They’ll require an amendment to change it.
Congress explicitly reserved the right to enforce the 14th Amendment to themselves in section 5
The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
I just posted this in case some idiot troll should say it requires a Constitutional Amd.
So, per Kavanaugh, if the Congress can narrow or amend Federal Constitutional law by legislation to address ‘birthright citizenship’, then what is to stop them doing the same thing to the Second Amendment? the First Amendment? Any other Amendment?
I’m not sure this is a slippery slope down which we want to travel...
Because none of those amendments have a clause within them that specifically allow congress to enforce them through legislation.
There is no slippery slope here. It is literally a more constructionist view of the constitution.
The real issue is would enough Justices stay logically consistent if such a law was challenged and support it per the constitution or would they flip for ideologies sake. I think we know the answer already.
Kavanaugh is right, but also a fool to trust in the good faith arguments from his peers.
Congress wants the ‘imperial’ presidencies to persist. In this fashion they don’t have to take a stand on the hard questions. Instead, each side gains a fight to raise money and not resolve. Allow a court of law (not justice) bicker with executive orders (imperial decrees) that can have the media shape for public consumption to give the appearance of a functioning government.
Today’s version of the Stamp Act Congress is missing its window of opportunity. They don’t have the guts to threaten their incumbency status
Expand apportionment and repeal popular vote of US Senators - need to decentralize the consolidation of power in DC and return to greater local and state influence. That will require collusion on a more significant scale which would be easier to expose.
This beats my idea to declare them diplomats, but it comes with its own legal problems. I would like to see an actual amendment proposed
Many laws need to be passed specifically and legalese wriggle room proof granularity as DEFINITION of words and phrases in the Constitution. 2A is also in great need of explanation.
About damn time.
Now, will it go anywhere...
(not holding my breath)
Yes, Skwor, I read the Amendment and the clause you note. My concern is not unlike that which you raised regarding logical consistency and the Court.
I do not believe that is something we can count on. In fact, I can see the Court extending the legislation ‘quirk’ to other cases coming before them.
Thank you for the post.
Section 5 says Congress can indeed do this. It’s already there.
“why?”
Because John Thune does not serve the best interests of the American people or the USA. Instead he serves his globalists masters who will soon require all nations receive their Digital ID, Social Credit Score, Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) and AI algorithms redistributing critical global resources all tokenized onto the Blockchain.
We are witnessing the spirit of anti-Christ rising up for the last days.
“I’m not sure this is a slippery slope down which we want to travel...”
Well said.
And make it clear that ‘illegal alien births’ prior were not and were never intended to grant citizenship. Tell the SCOTUS to suck on that. Cut off their welfare, freebies, employment - the only thing they get is a cheap-o ticket one-way to their parent’s country of origin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.