When the U.S. Supreme Court issued its 14^th Amendment birthright citizenship decision, it drove a stake right through the heart of election integrity in this nation, and guaranteed there would be virtually unrestrained foreign influence in our elections.

New headlines have registered the truth of the deplorable fact that 14^th Amendment abuse has been well underway for quite some time. In January, 2018, NBC posted this headline: “Birth tourism brings Russian baby boom to Miami.”

A Wallstreet Journal headline in December of 2025 read: “Chinese Billionaires Having Dozens of U.S.-Born Babies Via Surrogate” with the sub-title: “Videogame executive Xu Bo said to have more than 100 children, and other elites build mega-families, testing citizenship laws and drawing on nannies, IVF and legal firms set up to help them.”

Birthright tourism is a flourishing industry.

ALL of these “citizens” will have the right to VOTE in American elections, either via absentee ballot from their true native land, or from their American soil domicile.

All of these children will be enabled to bring their extended families to the U.S. through chain migration. Those who do not assimilate as real Americans have the potential of “fundamentally transforming” (i.e. destroying) America as it was founded to be.

This is the path to national suicide condoned, sanctioned and incentivized by the U.S. Supreme Court in its

Birth Right Citizenship decision last month.

They. Got. It. Wrong.

Instead of relying on the original intent of the 14^th Amendment, they leaned on the distorted, more recent misinterpretation of it in more recent years.

Instead of correcting a disastrous historical error, they enshrined that error into permanence and issued a clear and almost inevitable path to national suicide.

During the time the 14^th Amendment was being crafted, voted on and sold to the states, its authors and proponents argued extensively that its guarantee of birthright citizenship would NEVER apply to children born to individuals in this country either temporarily or illegally.

They made it abundantly clear that its application was for those previously enslaved in the American South and their descendants, and for children of immigrants granted permanent residency status.

That’s why they included the most important phrase, “…and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” 

People here illegally or temporarily (student visa, work visa, tourist visa) are NOT subjects of America but of the country of their origin.

That same status applies to any children born to those individuals; by virtue of the fact that they are minors and not yet sovereign individuals, they do not have their own status, but are defined by the status of their parentage.

After its passage, the 14^th Amendment was applied correctly for 40+ years before it began to be twisted into the pretzel it has been since then, and baked into permanency by the recent SCOTUS decision.

Jeff Childers, in his daily “Coffee and Covid” newsletter, remarked:

• “In his scathing dissent, Justice Alito wrote what we are all thinking:

‘This is one of the most important decisions in the history of the Court, and in my judgment, the Court has made a serious mistake.’ Justice Thomas, known for his brevity, landed a massive, novella-length, 91-page dissent, which I believe to be the longest dissent of his extensive career - nearly twice his previous record.

• “Dissenting Justices Thomas and Alito argued that the majority defined the word ‘jurisdiction’ too broadly, erroneously treating it as a synonym for ‘within our borders.’ Roberts shot back that the dissenters were adding requirements into the word —like domicile and allegiance— that aren’t explicitly there.

• “To give you a taste, Justice Thomas made this common-sense argument about the definition:

‘The country had just emerged from a civil war that cost the lives of over 600,000 men due to a treasonous denial of allegiance to the Union. Going forward, there would be no national citizenship absent a reasonable expectation of national allegiance.’

• Three justices wrote at length —91 pages in Thomas’s case— laying out a fully developed alternative constitutional framework and calling birthright citizenship the Supreme Court’s ‘most important issue.’ 

• Kavanaugh supplied a roadmap for Congress.”

Justice Kavanaugh, though he sided with the Court’s majority, wrote, “The Constitution’s Citizenship Clause may well be ambiguous on this precise question.

• “But Congress resolved that ambiguity by codifying birthright citizenship broadly in 8 U.S.C. §1401(a).

• “The executive order doesn’t violate the Constitution — it violates Congress’s statute. And Congress can change that statute.”

Although SCOTUS got it wrong, CONGRESS can make things right… because Congress has the power to clarify the definitions

of “CITIZEN” and “JURISDICTION.”

Both major political parties used to be in alignment on this issue.

In 1993, Harry Reid (D-NV) advanced a bill to outlaw birthright citizenship. He was quoted on October 31, 2018, by the Washington Post as saying “No sane country would allow birthright citizenship.”

The Democrat bill introduced by Reid stipulated,

“Any person born after the date of enactment of this title to a mother who is neither a citizen of the United States nor admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident… shall be considered as born subject to the jurisdiction of that foreign country and not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States within the meaning of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment and shall therefore not be a citizen of the United States.”

On June 30, 2026, just eight days ago, Senator Moreno of Ohio

announced he will reintroduce Harry Reid’s exact bill.

Also on June 30, 2026, the DOJ issued new orders to all districts, prioritizing prosecution of birth tourism, which is already illegal under federal law.

Senior DOJ official Colin McDonald issued a directive that people who come to the United States under “false pretenses” to give birth and secure ⁠citizenship for their child could be criminally charged under laws barring visa fraud, money laundering, identity theft and wire fraud.

To quote Childers (on p.2):

“This time, legislators can’t drag their feet claiming that Trump is asking them to do something unconstitutional, because Kavanaugh just green-lit it. They can’t complain it isn’t urgent, because Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch called it critically important in their dissents. Half of the conservative justices would have supported Trump’s order, with one explaining how Congress can fix it.”

More good news:

To lean again on the wisdom of Jeff Childers, “Before 2026, birthright citizenship was a wonky, fringe argument that had not captured the American public’s attention. Now the issue is all over social media. For the first time since 1898, the public is engaged.”

Childers urges us to see the SCOTUS ruling as “a step forward, a necessary, stepwise increment toward reversing a schizophrenic, controversial, 128-year-old law.”

It is a challenging perspective for us to take, emotionally. It demands that we rely upon the 535 mostly feckless, impotent, dysfunctional and cowardly members of the U.S. House and Senate.

But when Americans work together with resolve,

there is NOTHING we cannot accomplish.

• Demand unceasingly that Congress DO ITS JOB

• End the silent filibuster

• Pass the SAVE America Act

• Pass the Reid/McDonald Birthright Citizenship Ban.

Let’s DO this, America!!!

Click here to post on your social media.<

pdf of article