Up to 26,000 babies are born in the United States each year through birth tourism, according to the most expansive — and contested — estimate. That is a tiny fraction of the more than 3.5 million annual US births. Yet the practice has taken center stage in the Trump administration's effort to end the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on his first day back in office that would limit automatic citizenship to children born to at least one US citizen or lawful permanent resident parent. The administration made birth tourism a central pillar of its legal case during the historic April 1 Supreme Court oral argument in Trump v. Barbara (No. 25-365).

How many babies does birth tourism actually involve?

No official count exists. The closest proxy comes from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which reported almost 9,600 babies born in 2024 in the United States and its territories to foreign mothers listing an address outside the country. That figure both overstates and understates the phenomenon: it includes women who did not intend to give birth in the US, and it excludes those who used a US address to avoid scrutiny.

The Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank advocating lower immigration, puts the annual number between 22,000 and 26,000. Either way, the rate has held steady over time against 3.7 million total births in 2024.

By contrast, the Migration Policy Institute calculates the executive order would leave an estimated 255,000 babies born annually without US citizenship — to parents who are either unauthorized immigrants or on long-term temporary visas. MPI projects ending birthright citizenship could grow the unauthorized population by up to 2.7 million people by 2045 and 5.4 million by 2075.

What rules already restrict birth tourism?

Giving birth on US soil as a temporary visa holder is not illegal. Securing a visa for that purpose is fraud and grounds for inadmissibility. Federal measures now in force include:

• A 2020 State Department regulation, still in effect, rendering inadmissible B-2 (tourist) visa holders traveling primarily to give birth. The rule shifts the burden onto pregnant women to prove otherwise.
• Criminal prosecutions: the first federal charges came in 2019 against 19 individuals linked to Chinese birth tourism schemes. The owners of USA Happy Baby received 41-month prison sentences in late 2024 and early 2025.
• An ICE initiative launched in April 2026 to investigate birth tourism networks, visa fraud and associated financial crimes.
• A 2024 modification of the Northern Mariana Islands' visa-free programs amid abuse concerns.

Companies in China, Russia and elsewhere sell end-to-end packages — visas, housing, medical care, transportation — for fees ranging from $20,000 to $100,000. News reports cited by the government reference more than 500 companies operating in China alone.

Why do the Northern Mariana Islands matter?

The Pacific US territory attracts scrutiny because two programs allow entry without a visa: the Guam-CNMI Visa Waiver Program (45 days for nationals of certain countries, operating since 2009) and the Economic Vitality and Security Travel Authorization Program, which lets Chinese nationals visit CNMI visa-free for 14 days. DHS implemented EVS-TAP in early 2025 at the CNMI government's urging, directly in response to birth tourism concerns.

The trend there has reversed sharply. Fewer than ten tourist births were recorded the year before the Guam-CNMI program began; by 2018 there were around 600. In 2025, CNMI's delegate to Congress, Kimberlyn King-Hinds, reported just 47 babies born to tourists.

What did the Supreme Court hear?

Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued the United States is far more accessible to travelers than in 1868, when the 14th Amendment was ratified, and needs a new citizenship system. Chief Justice John Roberts responded bluntly: "It's a new world. It's the same Constitution."

The case turns on five words of the 14th Amendment — "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." The administration reads the phrase as requiring domicile, or a permanent home, meaning unauthorized immigrants can never qualify. Challengers rely on the English common law tradition, under which geography governs, with exceptions only for children of diplomats and "alien enemies." Justice Samuel Alito raised the hypothetical of a US-born child of Iranian descent subject to Iranian military obligations.

Who is affected?

Opponents note the babies who would lose citizenship at birth far outnumber those born through birth tourism, and that prior executive actions — the 2020 B-2 rule, prosecutions, and heightened screening of pregnant travelers — already target the practice. More than 30 countries apply jus soli; Ireland abandoned it by referendum in 2004, and the United Kingdom in 1983.

Whether the Court accepts birth tourism as a reason to narrow a 150-year-old constitutional protection remains to be decided. Readers should follow the official filings in Trump v. Barbara and State Department visa guidance for authoritative updates.