Citizenship Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Gill, Brandon [R-TX-26]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 22, 2026
Bottom line
The bill seeks to significantly alter birthright citizenship by reinterpreting the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause, primarily targeting children of unauthorized immigrants and birth tourists.
What it actually does
This bill redefines who is subject to U.S. jurisdiction for birthright citizenship purposes, specifically excluding children born in the U.S. to individuals deemed "invaders." It designates unauthorized immigrants, birth tourists, and nationals of "covered nations" engaging in commercial surrogacy as "invaders." The bill also asserts that the determination of an "invasion" is a nonjusticiable political question, aiming to prevent judicial review of this declaration.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue the bill fulfills a constitutional duty to protect states from invasion, addresses a national security crisis caused by illegal immigration, and reclaims the original intent of the Fourteenth Amendment by excluding children of "invaders" from birthright citizenship, thereby deterring further unauthorized entry and birth tourism.
Opponents contend
Opponents would likely argue the bill is unconstitutional, directly contradicting established interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment and Supreme Court precedent. They would contend it creates a second class of residents, violates human rights, and could lead to complex legal challenges and administrative burdens, while failing to address the root causes of migration.
The bill is relatively short and its core provisions are clearly stated, making it accessible for a quick review, though its legal and constitutional implications are profound.
Section 1
Short Title
This section formally names the act the "Citizenship Act of 2026." This is a standard legislative practice that provides a convenient and concise way to refer to the legislation in public discourse and legal documents, making it easier to track and discuss.
Supporters argue
Naming the bill clearly helps with legislative tracking and public discourse, ensuring that all stakeholders can easily identify and refer to the specific piece of legislation.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against this provision as it is a standard procedural element of legislation.
Tradeoffs
None.
Section 2
Congressional Findings on Invasion and Citizenship
This section outlines 21 findings, asserting that illegal immigration constitutes an "invasion" under Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution. It claims Congress has the power to establish naturalization rules and that birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment does not apply to children of "invaders." It cites a hypothetical Supreme Court case and existing precedent to support its reinterpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Section 3
Defining "Invaders"
This section defines who is designated an "invader" for the purposes of denying birthright citizenship. It includes persons not lawfully admitted to the U.S., those otherwise unlawfully present, and those seeking admission for the purpose of birth tourism. Additionally, it designates nationals of "covered nations" (referencing 10 U.S.C. 4872(f)(2), which includes countries like China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea) who engage in commercial surrogacy contracts in the U.S. as invaders.
Section 4
Excluding Children of Invaders from Birthright Citizenship
This section amends Section 301(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to explicitly exclude three categories of persons from birthright citizenship: (1) children born to an invader (unlawfully present/admitted) if the mother was unlawfully present and the father was not a U.S. citizen or LPR; (2) children born to an invader (birth tourist) if the mother sought admission for birth tourism and the father was not a U.S. citizen or LPR; and (3) children born to an invader (covered nation national in commercial surrogacy) as a result of a commercial surrogacy contract.
Section 5
Limiting Judicial Review of Invasion Determinations
This section explicitly states that no court is authorized to review a determination by the President or Congress regarding the existence of an "invasion." This aims to prevent legal challenges to the foundational premise of the bill.
Section 6
Clarifying Jurisdiction and Military Force
This section clarifies that the Act does not revoke criminal or civil jurisdiction of the United States or any State over "invaders" for violations of federal or state law. It also explicitly states that the Act does not authorize the use of military force under the War Powers Resolution.
Section 7
Applicability to Children Born After Enactment
This section establishes that the Act will apply to all children born after its date of enactment to a person who, at the time of such birth, was designated as an "invader" pursuant to Section 3. This means the changes are prospective, not retroactive.
Section 8
Severability Clause
This is a standard legislative clause stating that if any provision of the Act, or any amendment made by it, is held to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will remain in effect. The invalid provision will be construed to give it maximum legal effect or be deemed severable.
This subsection defines "covered nation" by reference to section 4872(f)(2) of title 10, United States Code, which typically includes countries like China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. This implicitly designates nationals from these specific countries who engage in commercial surrogacy in the U.S. as "invaders."
Section 3(b)
Why it matters:While referencing other statutes is standard legislative practice to avoid repeating lengthy lists or definitions, in this context, it obscures the specific geopolitical targeting of the provision, which could be politically sensitive.
Case for: Proponents would argue this is a necessary measure to counter specific adversarial nations that may be exploiting birth tourism for strategic purposes, as mentioned in the bill's findings, thereby protecting national security.
Case against: Critics would argue this provision is discriminatory and could be seen as targeting specific ethnic or national groups under the guise of national security, potentially leading to profiling and diplomatic tensions.
Estimated impact: Targets a specific, though potentially small, subset of birth tourism, primarily from countries deemed adversaries by the U.S. government.