Immigration was a key factor that led Donald Trump to victory in 2024. Most Americans, including legal immigrants, believe that strong measures need to be taken to protect the never-ending onslaught at the nation’s border. But Trump’s immigration-related executive actions enacted days after taking office are far-reaching and may have unintended consequences. By declaring a national emergency at the border, Trump has tapped into the Pentagon’s resources to address the situation. But unless carefully and thoughtfully implemented, there is the potential for severe harm to America and Americans.

Perhaps most controversial is his executive order ending “birthright citizenship.” The 14th Amendment states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States. … ” This long-debated issue is rightly being litigated, as the president cannot revoke a constitutional right via executive order.

Much of the debate centers around what the writers of the 14th Amendment intended with the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction.” Some argue that the children of “illegal aliens,” like their parents, are loyal to another nation and are therefore not “under the jurisdiction” of the United States. The fact that children of diplomats, who owe allegiance to another country, do not acquire U.S. citizenship even if they are born in the United States, indicates that there are limitations to the principle of “jus soli,” or right of the soil.

Eliminating birthright citizenship may not stop the never-ending flow of migrants at our borders, but it would be a deterrent. Currently, the U.S. and Canada are the only developed nations that permit unrestricted birthright citizenship. Other nations, such as the UK and France, have added conditions. For example, in the UK, you must have one citizen parent or have been deemed to be “settled” in the UK.

The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that approximately 7.5% of all births in the U.S. (about 300,000 births per year) are to illegal aliens. In addition, birth tourism is alive and well.

In a recent visit to Saipan, I learned that it is a mecca for individuals from China and Japan to give birth to U.S. citizen children. These children return to their countries, often growing up knowing little about the country of their birth. Having young U.S. citizens growing up around the world, who know nothing about our country but have unfettered access, is troubling — and possibly dangerous.

At the end of an immigration law course I was teaching, I mentioned that it was time to end “birthright citizenship.” One woman in the class walked out after emphatically stating that eliminating it would lead to discriminatory practices and stateless children.

Denying birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens or tourists does not mean we are creating a sub-category of individuals who will grow up here and be discriminated against. There are many options that are both fair and compassionate. These children can be granted temporary lawful status, allowing them to study and work here, and perhaps even a pathway to citizenship once they are adults and meet certain requirements.

So how do we go about making this significant change to our citizenship laws? Instead of endlessly debating the intent of the framers of the 14th Amendment, we should establish what the American people want now — through a referendum and constitutional amendment. It is, after all, a Constitution of the people, by the people, and for the people. Let’s never forget that.

Kamana Mathur is an immigration attorney, former U.S. diplomat, former asylum officer with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in Honolulu, and an immigrant herself.