Entering the U.S. on a nonimmigrant visa to give birth on American soil and obtain birthright U.S. citizenship for the newborn child is known as Birth Tourism. Executive Order 14419, issued by the Trump Administration on August 6, 2026, is meant to end Birth Tourism and further prohibit any foreign national from helping a visitor to enter the U.S. to give birth.
Link Between Birthright Citizenship and Birth Tourism
Under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, birth in the United States gives the child automatic citizenship with all its rights and privileges, even if the parents are not U.S. citizens or permanent residents or have no authorized stay in the U.S.
Birth citizenship also provides the foreign national parent with potential immigration relief. For example, upon turning age 21, a U.S. citizen son or daughter may file an immigrant petition for a parent in the Immediate Relatives category, which has no numerical limits on immigrant visas available.
Prior Executive Order to Limit Birthright Citizenship
The Trump Administration has stated that “Citizenship is not a commodity to be acquired through calculated exploitation and evasion of the immigration laws, such as by entering the United States on a nonimmigrant visa for the purpose of giving birth within the Nation’s borders.”
The Administration previously issued Executive Order 14160 on January 20, 2025, to deny the issuance of documents or acceptance of documents recognizing U.S. citizenship to two groups of U.S.-born children: (1) those whose mother was unlawfully present in the United States and whose father was not a U.S. citizen or permanent resident at the time of birth or (2) those whose mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and whose father was not a U.S. citizen or permanent resident at the time of birth.
Several U.S. states and nonprofit organizations challenged the Executive Order in federal courts, which blocked its implementation. On June 30, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court settled the question in Trump v. Barbara, a class-action lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups on behalf of affected families. In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Executive Order 14160 violates the 14th Amendment, which is interpreted to mean that children born on American soil are U.S. citizens, regardless of whether the parents are unlawfully or temporarily present in the U.S.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote: “Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights — to freely participate in our political community. The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land.’ …We keep that promise today.”
Due to the federal courts’ orders and the Supreme Court’s decision, the Executive Order to restrict birthright citizenship never went into effect.
Executive Order to End Birth Tourism is Narrower
About a month after the Supreme Court’s decision, the Trump Administration issued Executive Order 14419 to end Birth Tourism. Instead of redefining birthright citizenship, it reduces access to it.
The U.S. Department of State (DOS) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) are instructed to update rules, policies, procedures or guidance as necessary and to take actions to enforce the Executive Order, including:
- denying a visa or other travel authorization to an applicant entering or attempting to enter the United States for the purpose of engaging in birth tourism;
- revoking the visa or travel authorization and permanently barring entry of any applicant who enters or attempts to enter the United States for the purpose of engaging in birth tourism;
- denying entry to or removing an applicant who previously engaged or plans to engage in birth tourism;
- fighting against entities, organizations, or individuals, within or outside of the United States, responsible for facilitating or enabling birth tourism in any manner.
The DOS and DHS may exempt a foreign national from actions taken pursuant to this order on humanitarian or national interest grounds, based on their discretion.
The Executive Order is a change in policy, not U.S. immigration law or the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore, Birth Tourism involves entries for the main purpose of giving birth, not incidental pregnancy during lawful H-1B employment, F-1 studies, or other legitimate authorized stays.
Implementation of Birth Tourism Prevention Task Force
On August 12, 2026, the U.S. Department of State said it established the Birth Tourism Prevention Task Force and “is using all available tools to defend the integrity of U.S. citizenship, ensure nonimmigrant visas are used only for their lawful and intended purposes, and prevent their exploitation through birth tourism.”
The Fact Sheet from the Office of the Spokesperson states the Task Force:
- reviews the activities of visa holders worldwide to identify instances of birth tourism, take action to revoke visas of those who engage in or facilitate it, and dismantle the networks that profit from this abuse.
- addresses the abuse by analyzing and connecting information held across the Department and other federal agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
- coordinates with the Department of State to address birth tourism on a global scale, examining travel histories of individuals from all around the world in order to end this exploitation and abuse.
- has taken action to revoke more than 600 visas from foreign nationals across the globe to safeguard the nation from this abuse.
Previous Actions Against Birth Tourism
In the past, there was no specific law, regulation or policy prohibiting birth tourism per se or preventing a pregnant woman from entering the United States. Nonetheless, U.S. consular officers and customs officers often view it as a misuse of the visitor visa status and a gaming of the immigration system to give the child automatic citizenship.
On January 24, 2020, during the first term of the Trump Administration, a new rule was issued to restrict travel on a B visitor visa primarily to give birth in the United States. The updated U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual states the following on B-2 Tourist Visas:
“Travel to give birth in the United States: Visiting temporarily for pleasure does not include travel for the primary purpose of obtaining U.S. citizenship for a child by giving birth in the United States. Any B nonimmigrant visa applicant who you have reason to believe will give birth during their stay in the United States is presumed to be traveling for the primary purpose of obtaining U.S. citizenship for the child. The applicant can overcome this presumption if you find that the primary purpose of travel is not obtaining U.S. citizenship for a child.”
If officers have reason to believe the applicants will give birth during their stay in the United States, they are required to presume that giving birth to obtain U.S. citizenship is the applicant’s primary purpose of travel. The applicant may overcome the presumption if they show, to the consular officer’s satisfaction, they have a different and permissible primary purpose of travel.
Examples are: (1) applicant’s primary purpose for travel is to visit a dying family member, and during the visit the applicant may give birth in the United States because the pregnancy due date overlaps with the family member’s last expected months of life; (2) medically complicated pregnancy and arrangement for specialized medical care in the United States, because such specialized care is not available in or near the country where the applicant resides.
If the officer sees the applicant is pregnant at the time of applying for a tourist visa or requesting admission as a visitor, he may refuse the visa or deny entry. This is why birth tourists who hail from various countries such as China, Taiwan, South Korea, Russia, Brazil and Mexico, typically come to the United States when their pregnancy is not so obvious.
Because a visitor visa may be used for medical treatment, your showing that giving birth in the United States served or serves a health purpose can be a positive factor. An example is if the pregnancy comes with high risks or serious complications. When you declare you are coming to the U.S. to give birth, and there is a lack of medical care in or near your country, the officer may grant the visa or admission based on proof of strong ties to your country, nonimmigrant intent, sufficient funds to cover all medical costs, and legitimate purpose of travel.
Paying all medical bills or having your own medical insurance to cover the expenses related to childbirth can help prevent a visa refusal or denial of admission. Ultimately, however, the consular officer or customs officer has discretion to determine whether having a baby in the U.S. is inconsistent with the purpose of a visitor visa. If they find that this is your main purpose, instead of for recreational or business travel or medical treatment, they will refuse your request, even if you can cover the medical expenses and will not receive government assistance to pay the bills.
Practical Effects and Consequences
Longstanding U.S. immigration law allows a consular officer to deny a B-1/B-2 visitor visa or other non-dual intent visa under INA 214(b) (failure to overcome presumption of immigrant intent). Giving birth during a prior visit might cause the officer to suspect you will do this again.
A non-resident parent who travels with a U.S. citizen child may face tougher scrutiny at the U.S. port of entry. A customs officer who discovers you had a child during a prior visit in the U.S. may deny your request for admission on a temporary visa and even issue an expedited removal order, which carries a five-year bar under INA 212(a)(9)(A)(i). Until the bar expires, the person will need a Consent to Reapply for Admission or approved Form I-212 application to receive a U.S. visa or U.S. entry.
In some cases, a consular officer or customs officer may issue a more serious charge under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i)(fraud or willful misrepresentation of material fact to gain a visa or entry to the United States), which is a lifetime bar. When such an inadmissibility finding is made, you may appeal directly to the agency to reconsider and rescind the decision on the basis that giving birth in the U.S., by itself, does not make you inadmissible. But as long as the section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) bar holds, you will need a 212(d)(3) nonimmigrant waiver or a Form I-601/212(i) immigrant waiver to be admitted to the United States
Even if you succeed in gaining a visitor visa or entering the United States as a visitor to give birth, you might still encounter problems in the future when you apply for a new visa or admission as a nonimmigrant. Also, in some cases, an existing visa may be revoked or cancelled. Federal regulations under 22 CFR 41.122 allow U.S. consular officers to revoke a nonimmigrant visa at any time, at their discretion. A U.S. Customs & Border Protection officer at the U.S. port of entry may also revoke (physically cancel) the visa in certain situations.
Short of banning birthright citizenship, the Executive Order serves to discourage nonimmigrants from traveling to the U.S. specifically to give birth and get automatic citizenship for their newborn children. Nonimmigrants who have visas to work or study in the United States should be less affected than temporary visitors, as giving birth in the U.S. would be more incidental to their authorized stay.
The DOS and DHS are expected to rollout implementing guidance on how they will apply the Executive Order. Whether this Presidential Action holds up under any federal court action will need to be monitored over the next several months.
# # #
This content is general information and is for educational purposes only. It is based on current U.S. immigration laws, regulations and policies that are subject to change. Do not consider it as legal advice for any individual case or situation. Each case is different and even cases that seem similar can have different outcomes. The sharing or receipt of this information does not create an attorney-client relationship.
The U.S. Consulate granted immigrant visas to the father and mother of an adult U.S. citizen after previously denying them — one year earlier — under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) willful misrepresentation of material facts to gain U.S. immigration benefits).
In September 2018, the U.S. Embassy issued an H-1B temporary worker visa to my client after previously finding he is permanently inadmissible under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i), i.e. willful misrepresentation of material fact to gain U.S. immigration benefits. At the visa interview, he relied on my recommendations to explain why the misrepresentation bar does not apply to him.
