The U.S. State Department has drafted new guidance that would require parents applying for passports for their children to provide proof of their own citizenship or immigration status, according to a document reviewed by Reuters. The proposal represents the first detailed look at how the department could enforce President Donald Trump’s August 6 executive order targeting what the administration calls “birth tourism.”
The draft directive, which has not yet been made public, would mark a significant shift in passport adjudication. Currently, parents whose children were born in the United States need only prove parentage and present photo identification. They are asked to check a box on the application indicating whether they are U.S. citizens but are not required to submit supporting documentation.
New Documentation Requirements
Under the proposed rules, all parents or legal guardians would need to provide proof of their citizenship—such as a valid U.S. passport or birth certificate—or evidence of their immigration status, including an I-94 form or a legal permanent residency card. The State Department would use that information to determine whether a child qualifies for citizenship under the new executive order.
“The Department will require parental information and evidence of parental citizenship or immigration status as part of its determination whether the applicant is subject to EO 14418,” the draft guidance states, citing the executive order number.
State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott said in a statement that “President Trump has been unequivocal that this Administration will protect the meaning and value of American citizenship, full stop, and that includes making sure our passport adjudication process fully reflects that standard.”
Legal Battle Over Birthright Citizenship
Limiting birthright citizenship has been a top priority in Trump’s sweeping immigration crackdown. His initial executive order would have granted automatic citizenship at birth only to children with at least one parent who was a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down that order in a 6-3 ruling, finding it violated the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment.
The August 6 order is narrower, specifically targeting “birth tourism,” in which women travel to the United States to give birth so their children can obtain automatic citizenship. It would withhold citizenship from children with a parent who works for a foreign government in the U.S., is engaged in fraud or a commercial transaction to obtain citizenship, or is classified as an “alien enemy.”
Lawyers pursuing class-action lawsuits on behalf of babies who would be deprived of citizenship under Trump’s initial order have asked two different federal judges to block the latest order from taking effect. One lawsuit is before U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman in Greenbelt, Maryland, who voiced skepticism about the order at a hearing on Friday and allowed plaintiffs to revise their lawsuit.
Justice Department attorneys have argued that a restraining order would be inappropriate and that the legal challenge is premature, as federal agencies had yet to issue public guidance on implementation. The draft State Department proposal could undercut that argument by showing concrete steps toward enforcement.
