A significant portion of U.S. births—almost one in ten—has become the focus of a critical constitutional battle currently taking place before the Supreme Court of the United States. Officials are raising concerns about a global “birth tourism” industry that is partly contributing to this trend.
According to data from the Pew Research Center, roughly 320,000 babies were born in 2023 to mothers who were either in the country illegally or held only temporary legal status — accounting for about 9% of all U.S. births that year.
This figure marks the highest level in more than a decade and comes amid three consecutive years of increases.
The data has taken on renewed significance as Solicitor General John Sauer argued before the high court that the United States is facing not just illegal immigration, but an organized international system designed to exploit birthright citizenship.
During oral arguments in the case known as Trump v. Barbara, Sauer pointed to evidence of a significant birth tourism industry in China, citing analyses of federal data and media reports. According to those findings, no fewer than 500 companies have marketed U.S. birth packages to foreign clients, coaching pregnant women on how to secure visas and conceal their intent to give birth on American soil, The Dallas Express previously reported.
In the U.S. territory of Saipan, part of the Northern Mariana Islands, more than 70% of newborns in some periods were born to Chinese birth tourism parents, per The New York Post. The territory’s visa-free entry policies for certain foreign nationals made it a focal point for the practice, allowing children born there to automatically receive U.S. citizenship under current interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The scale of the issue has become central to President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to limit automatic citizenship for children born to non-citizen parents. His administration’s lawyers argue that the Constitution’s Citizenship Clause was never intended to apply to individuals without lawful or permanent ties to the country.
As previously reported by The Dallas Express, Sauer told justices that the 14th Amendment’s phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” implies allegiance tied to lawful presence — not merely being born within U.S. borders. However, attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union argued that longstanding precedent, including the 1898 case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, establishes a broad rule of birthright citizenship with only narrow exceptions.
Beyond the legal debate, the policy implications are driving the perception of urgency. “Under the current erroneous birthright citizenship interpretation, these children automatically become citizens and unlock food stamps, welfare, specialized schooling for English education, and eventually college aid,” Brandy Perez Carbaugh of the Heritage Foundation told The New York Post.
Critics disagree. “Birthright citizenship is essential to the meaning of being American. This constitutional guarantee has allowed the United States to become what it is now,” Jennie Murray, president and CEO of the National Immigration Forum, said in a previous press release. “Through our history the children of immigrants have helped drive American innovation and economic growth. ”
A ruling is expected later this year from the Supreme Court, which could redefine how the Constitution applies to modern immigration.
