Birthright CLAIM Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 14, 2026
Bottom line
H.R. 9662 seeks to redefine birthright citizenship by narrowing its scope for children of non-citizens and requiring paternity verification in specific cases, aiming to curb what proponents describe as 'anchor babies' and deter illegal immigration.
What it actually does
This bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to restrict birthright citizenship for children born in the United States to parents who are not U.S. citizens or nationals, and at least one of whom is unlawfully present or holds a non-permanent lawful status. It also increases the physical presence requirements for children born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent to acquire citizenship. Furthermore, it mandates DNA paternity testing for children born in the U.S. to mothers not lawfully present, if citizenship is claimed through a U.S. national or lawful permanent resident father, with parents bearing the cost.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the current interpretation of the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause encourages illegal immigration and 'birth tourism,' creating a loophole that undermines national sovereignty and immigration laws. They contend that limiting birthright citizenship to children of citizens or legal permanent residents, and requiring paternity verification, would deter individuals from entering the U.S. unlawfully and ensure that citizenship is granted appropriately, thereby strengthening the integrity of the immigration system and reducing the strain on public services.
Opponents contend
Opponents contend that this bill directly challenges the long-standing interpretation of the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause, which grants citizenship to nearly all persons born on U.S. soil. They argue that such changes would create a class of stateless individuals, complicate legal status for countless children, and lead to significant administrative burdens and potential discrimination. Critics also assert that the bill is likely unconstitutional and would face immediate legal challenges, while failing to address the root causes of irregular migration.
The bill is short and relatively easy to read, allowing for a quick understanding of its core provisions, though its legal and societal implications are extensive.
Section 2(a)
Limits Birthright Citizenship for Children of Non-Citizens
This provision amends Section 301(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. It specifies that a person born in the United States is not a citizen at birth if both parents are not U.S. citizens or nationals, and at least one parent was either unlawfully present in the U.S. or present in a lawful status other than lawful permanent residency at the time of birth. This effectively redefines who qualifies for birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue this change aligns with the original intent of the 14th Amendment, asserting it was not meant to grant citizenship to children of those without allegiance to the U.S. They believe it will deter illegal immigration and 'birth tourism,' reducing the perceived incentives for individuals to enter the country unlawfully.
Critics contend
Opponents argue this provision is unconstitutional, violating the plain text and historical interpretation of the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause. They contend it would create a marginalized class of individuals born in the U.S. but without citizenship, leading to significant legal and social instability.
Tradeoffs
The provision attempts to balance national sovereignty and immigration enforcement with the constitutional principle of birthright citizenship. It trades potential deterrence of illegal immigration for significant legal challenges and the creation of a new class of individuals with uncertain legal status.
Section 2(b)
Increases Physical Presence Requirements for Citizenship Abroad
This provision amends Section 301(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which governs citizenship for children born outside the U.S. to one U.S. citizen parent. It increases the required period of physical presence in the U.S. for the citizen parent from a total of five years (at least two after age 14) to a total of ten years (at least four after age 14, and three of which must be in the five-year period immediately preceding the child's birth). This makes it harder for children born abroad to acquire U.S. citizenship through a citizen parent.
Section 3 (adding new Section 309A)
Mandatory Paternity Verification for Citizenship Claims
This section introduces a new Section 309A to the Immigration and Nationality Act. It mandates that if a person is born in the U.S. to a mother who is not lawfully present, and citizenship is claimed through a U.S. national or lawful permanent resident father, biological paternity must be verified by a DNA test. The cost of this testing falls on the parents or legal guardians. Until paternity is verified, no federal agency can issue documents like passports, citizenship certificates, or social security numbers based on the person's claimed U.S. citizenship.
The cost of DNA testing for paternity verification shall be borne by the parents or legal guardians of the person alleged to be a citizen at birth.
Section 3, new Section 309A(b)
Why it matters:This is a standard legislative practice to include cost allocation within the relevant procedural section. However, for affected families, it represents a direct financial burden that might be overlooked by a casual reader.
Case for: Proponents argue that placing the cost burden on the parents is appropriate, as they are the ones seeking to establish citizenship and benefit from the process. It ensures that taxpayer funds are not used for individual paternity verification.
Case against: Opponents contend that this cost burden could be prohibitive for low-income families, particularly those with a parent who is unlawfully present and may have limited financial resources. This could create a barrier to establishing legitimate citizenship claims for children.
Estimated impact: This would impose an individual cost of several hundred dollars per DNA test on affected families.
No agency or department of the Federal Government may issue a passport, certificate of citizenship, social security number, or other document premised on the United States citizenship of a person described in subsection (a) until verification of paternity through DNA testing has been established.
Section 3, new Section 309A(c)
Why it matters:This is a technical legislative detail outlining the operational consequences of the new paternity verification requirement. It's not intentionally buried to obscure, but its full implications for affected individuals might not be immediately obvious.
Case for: Proponents argue this is a necessary enforcement mechanism to ensure the integrity of citizenship claims. Without this provision, individuals could potentially obtain documents based on unverified claims, undermining the purpose of the DNA testing requirement.
Case against: Opponents argue that withholding essential documents like social security numbers and passports could severely impact a child's ability to access education, healthcare, and other fundamental services, even if they are ultimately determined to be citizens. This could create significant hardship and administrative limbo for children.
Estimated impact: This would lead to delays in accessing federal benefits and services for an unknown number of children, potentially for extended periods.