'They Have No Business Being Granted Citizenship': US Senator Brands Illegal Immigrants Foreign Invaders, Anchor Babies

Indiana Senator Jim Banks has introduced legislation seeking to strip birthright citizenship from the American-born children of illegal immigrants, branding them 'foreign invaders' just weeks after the Supreme Court blocked a similar attempt by Donald Trump.

Speaking on 'The Hammer and Nigel Show' this week, the Indiana Republican did not mince his words. 'My bill would stop illegals from having their babies become American citizens,' he said. 'They have no business being granted citizenship.'

Bill Follows Supreme Court Setback for Trump

Banks' proposed Citizenship Act of 2026 comes after the Supreme Court ruled last month in Trump v Barbara that the president's executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship violated the 14th Amendment. The majority grounded its ruling in the 14th Amendment broadly, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh writing separately to note that while Trump's order conflicted with federal statute, Congress retained the power to legislate new exceptions to birthright citizenship.

Rather than challenge the ruling directly, Banks is leaning on Kavanaugh's concurring opinion as a narrower statutory path forward.

'The Supreme Court's birthright citizenship decision was an unprecedented assault on American sovereignty,' Banks said in a statement from his office. 'I'm leading the Citizenship Act to reverse the effects of this consequential ruling and ensure the millions of illegal aliens that invaded our country can't continue to exploit our immigration system.'

Bill Leans on 1898 Legal Precedent

The legislation defines anyone entering the US 'without authorisation or for the purpose of engaging in birth tourism' as an invader.

That framing borrows from the 1898 case United States v Wong Kim Ark, the very precedent the Supreme Court's majority relied on to reject Trump's order in the first place. The 1898 ruling carved out narrow exceptions to birthright citizenship for children of diplomats and hostile occupying forces. Legal scholars dispute Banks's characterisation, however, noting the Court's majority grounded its ruling in the 14th Amendment broadly rather than endorsing an 'invader' exception.

Banks argues that framing illegal immigration as an 'invasion' fits within those exceptions. He also took aim at surrogacy arrangements involving foreign nationals. 'These people are paying surrogates to have their baby in America so they can become anchor babies and be granted birthright citizenship,' he said, 'but that was never the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment.'

Bill Is Not the Only One in Congress

Banks is not working alone. Virginia Congressman John McGuire introduced a companion measure in the House last week, the Birthright Citizenship Clarification Act, which similarly seeks to strike down the 'jus soli' principle for specific categories of children born in the US.

Supporters of the push point to research from the Center for Immigration Studies, which estimated between 225,000 and 250,000 children were born to undocumented immigrant mothers in 2023, close to 7 per cent of all US births that year. It is worth noting, however, that other researchers put the comparable birth tourism figure far lower, with the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute estimating that as few as 26,000 births a year, out of 3.6 million total US births, can be attributed to foreign nationals travelling specifically to give birth in the country.

Neither Banks' Senate bill nor McGuire's House version attempts to bypass the Supreme Court ruling directly or amend the Constitution itself. Both instead try to use statutory changes, betting that Kavanaugh's concurrence offers a narrower legal path than a full constitutional amendment would require.

Numbers Still Favour an Uphill Fight

Passing either bill would still require clearing the Senate's 60-vote threshold for most legislation, a bar Republicans cannot reach without Democratic support in a chamber where the party holds a slim majority. Trump has separately called for the Supreme Court to rehear the case, though rehearings of this kind are rare.

If passed, the Citizenship Act would represent the most direct legislative attempt yet to narrow the 14th Amendment's guarantee of birthright citizenship, a right that has stood since 1868. The Supreme Court's ruling means any legislative path forward depends on whether Congress can secure the votes to test the boundaries Kavanaugh's concurrence outlined, a hurdle both bills face given the Senate's 60-vote threshold.