The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday regarding President Donald Trump’s attempt to restrict birthright citizenship, a policy rooted in the 14th Amendment. Solicitor General John Sauer presented what he called “striking” data on birth tourism during the proceedings.

The Scale of Birth Tourism

Birth tourism, the practice of traveling to the U.S. to give birth and secure automatic U.S. citizenship for the child, is notoriously difficult to quantify. Sauer highlighted that, according to reports from Chinese media as early as 2015, approximately 500 companies in the People’s Republic of China specialize in facilitating these trips.

Estimates and Challenges in Tracking

While precise figures remain elusive, Sauer cited media estimates suggesting over 1 million, and potentially 1.5 million, cases originating from China alone. He acknowledged “no one knows for sure” the exact numbers. A 2022 Senate Republican report noted the difficulty in tracking birth tourism due to the lack of specific data collection by the U.S. government.

Arguments Before the Court

The core of Wednesday’s arguments revolved around a 2025 executive order proposed by Trump, which seeks a narrower interpretation of the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause. The administration contends that the current birthright citizenship provision incentivizes illegal immigration.

The 14th Amendment and 'Jurisdiction'

The case hinges on the meaning of the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” within the 14th Amendment. Sauer argued that individuals in the country illegally or on temporary visas lack the ability to establish a “domicile” in the U.S., and therefore remain under the jurisdiction of their home country.

Recent Cases and Concerns

Concerns about birth tourism have been raised for years, with critics arguing it undermines the naturalization process. In 2024, Michael Liu and Phoebe Dong were convicted of conspiracy and money laundering for operating a birth tourism business that facilitated travel for pregnant Chinese women using false pretenses.

Trump's Perspective

President Trump, who attended the oral arguments – a first for a sitting president – described the birthright citizenship provision as a relic of the Civil War era, originally intended for the children of slaves. He stated it was “the craziest thing I’ve ever seen” to allow wealthy individuals to exploit the system.

Chief Justice Roberts' Response

Chief Justice John Roberts questioned the relevance of Sauer’s birth tourism claims to the legal analysis at hand. Sauer responded that the 19th-century framers of the amendment could not have foreseen modern implications like birth tourism, noting the ease of international travel today. Roberts countered, stating, “It’s the same Constitution.”