Trump to end birth right citizenship, will hit Indians in US

Context: US President Donald Trump has sought to revoke birthright citizenship,
automatic citizenship of children born in the US to non-citizen parents. The Indian
American community, which is one of the fastest-growing immigrant populations
in the US, will be profoundly impacted by this change as and when it comes
through. According to estimates on the 2022 US Census Bureau data, Indian
American number over 5.4 million as of 2024, comprising 1.47% of the US
population, among these two thirds are first-generation immigrants, while the
rest are US-born citizens.

Key points

·       Overview: The change in
policy if implemented with Trumps order, children born to Indian nationals who
are on temporary work visas (like H-1B) or waiting for the Green card would no
longer automatically acquire US citizenship.

·       Birthright
Citizenship: Jus Soli - Citizenship by birth within a country, regardless of
parental citizenship.

Jus Sanguinis - Citizenship
determined by a parent’s nationality or ethnicity, irrespective of birthplace.

US - The 14th
Amendment guarantees jus soli citizenship.

India -
Initially followed jus soli but incorporated jus sanguinis through amendments.

·       Shift
in India’s citizenship policy: 1987 Amendment - Citizenship was
granted only if at least one parent was an Indian citizen.

2004 Amendment - Citizenship
required one parent to be an Indian citizen and the other not to be an illegal
immigrant.

·       Trump’s
plan to end jus soli: Trump aims to eliminate birthright citizenship,
arguing that it promotes illegal immigration and “birth tourism.” He suggests
requiring at least one parent to be a US citizen or lawful permanent resident
for a child to gain automatic citizenship. This would align the US more closely
with jus sanguinis principles.

·       Impacts
on Indian families in the US: Children of Green Card Holders - May
not acquire automatic citizenship, necessitating naturalisation.

H-1B Visa
Holders - Citizenship would depend on parental visa status, potentially limiting
opportunities.

Undocumented
Families - Legal and social uncertainties could deepen.

·       Legal
challenges: US - The 14th Amendment explicitly guarantees jus soli
citizenship. Ending it would require a constitutional amendment or a Supreme
Court ruling overturning precedent. Executive orders to modify citizenship laws
would likely face legal challenges.

India - India’s
amendments to citizenship laws were implemented through legislative processes,
avoiding direct constitutional changes.

·       Comparing
India’s shift to Trump’s Plan: Drivers of Change - India’s changes
stemmed from concerns over illegal immigration and demographic shifts in border
areas. The US debate focuses on national security, illegal immigration, and
perceived exploitation of the system.

Legal Pathways - India’s shift
was achieved through legislative amendments. In the US, constitutional
amendments or Supreme Court rulings are necessary, making change more complex.

Social Impacts - In India, the
amendments created significant challenges for affected communities, especially
in regions like Assam. In the US, ending jus soli could disproportionately
impact immigrant communities, including Indians.

·       Lessons
for the US from India’s experience: Policy Design -
Changes must consider humanitarian implications alongside national interests.

Legal Safeguards
-
Clarity is essential to avoid disenfranchisement or legal ambiguities.

Social Stability
-
Restrictive citizenship laws can lead to long-term societal divisions.

·       Conclusion: The US and
India’s experiences highlight the delicate balance between national security
and inclusivity in citizenship policies. While India’s shift to jus sanguinis
reflects its unique regional challenges, the US’s proposed changes face
significant legal and social hurdles. Both cases underscore the importance of
crafting policies that uphold justice, inclusion, and stability.