2026-08-29 07:00:39 EDT / 福克斯新闻
政令针对外国恐怖组织成员及外交官子女，同时打击生育旅游
作者：罗伯特·施马德 福克斯新闻
发布于2026年8月29日 美国东部时间早上7:00
法律专家表示，在最高法院遭遇挫折后，特朗普新推出的公民身份权推进举措拥有更坚实的法律基础。
学者们一致认为，唐纳德·特朗普总统新一批涉及公民身份权的行政命令提出了新颖的法律问题。
NEW 您现在可以收听福克斯新闻文章！
保守派法律专家表示，唐纳德·特朗普总统最新限制公民身份权和打击生育旅游的尝试，可能比他首次尝试拥有更坚实的法律基础。
今年6月，最高法院以6票对3票作出裁决，根据第十四修正案，父母非法或临时居留美国所生的子女出生时即为公民。此后，特朗普发布了两项新的行政命令，以更有限的方式处理公民身份和生育旅游问题。
8月6日签署的第一项政令指示联邦机构，拒绝向某些父母均非美国公民的出生儿童提供公民身份认可文件，其中包括父母为指定外国恐怖组织成员、外国政府雇员，或参与旨在通过欺诈获取公民身份权交易的儿童。
曼哈顿研究所、美国优先法律事务所和美国优先政策研究所均为右翼组织，其专家认为，特朗普的新政令比首次尝试更具针对性，且基于长期存在的公民身份权例外情况，他们认为这些例外可适用于本案。
特朗普在最高法院受挫后签署行政令，针对公民身份权与生育旅游
奥尔加·乌尔比纳和她9个月大的儿子阿瑞斯·韦伯斯特2025年5月15日在最高法院外抗议唐纳德·特朗普终结公民身份权的举措。(德鲁·安杰里尔/法新社通过盖蒂图片社拍摄)
“最高法院长期以来承认，第十四修正案公民身份权条款存在例外情况，适用于被视为入侵军队子女或大使子女的外籍人士，”曾担任司法部幕僚长的美国优先政策研究所高级研究员查德·米泽尔告诉福克斯新闻数字频道。“因此，在这种情况下，一名违反美国法律入境的恐怖分子……企图造成伤害……这早已得到最高法院的承认，基本上可以追溯到我国历史，被视为对任何公民身份权主张的公认例外。”
1898年最高法院裁决的“美国诉钟万益案”承认，外交官子女和敌对占领期间出生的外侨敌人子女属于公民身份权例外情况。特朗普的政令辩称，外国恐怖组织成员可归入该敌人例外范畴。
特朗普公民身份权斗争借“入侵者”论调卷土重来，背靠卡瓦诺的路线图
2025年6月27日，唐纳德·特朗普总统在华盛顿白宫詹姆斯·S·布雷迪新闻简报室举行新闻发布会，此前美国最高法院作出限制公民身份权适用范围的裁决。(梅赫梅特·埃塞尔/中东图片社通过法新社拍摄)(盖蒂图片社)
“最高法院裁定，你不能将公民身份权限制给临时或非法居留美国的人的子女，”曼哈顿研究所宪法研究主任伊利亚·夏皮罗告诉福克斯新闻数字频道。“但新的行政命令所做的是援引公民身份权的两个经典例外：一是效忠外国政府的人，即受雇于外国政府的外交官或类似身份者；二是外国军队入侵者和恐怖分子，外国敌对组织的成员当然符合这一类别。”
然而， libertarian卡托研究所移民研究主任大卫·比尔认为，总统试图在不经国会批准的情况下重新定义外侨敌人的定义，这会让政府陷入法律不稳定的境地。
“国会最终才有权确定谁受美国司法管辖，”比尔告诉福克斯新闻数字频道。“只有获得认证的外交官享有非常有限的例外，所有其他在美国境内的人都受美国法律管辖，因此总统仅凭自身权力就能决定谁受美国司法管辖和美国法律约束的想法，实际上是对行政权力的激进扩张和主张，在美国历史上确实是前所未有的。”
杰克逊在公民身份权冲突中指责托马斯呼应臭名昭著的种族主义法院裁决
2026年4月1日，美国最高法院位于华盛顿特区。唐纳德·特朗普总统正致力于终止父母非法居留或持临时签证在美国出生的子女的自动公民身份权，这是他打击无证移民 broader举措的一部分，这一变革可能推翻一个多世纪的法律先例。(格雷姆·斯隆/彭博社通过盖蒂图片社拍摄)
“我确实认为这个案件正在检验与之前案件不同的主张，”比尔补充道，他解释说当前问题更多与行政权力而非公民身份权有关。“而且我认为这也更值得质疑。”
弗吉尼亚大学法学院教授阿曼达·弗罗斯特指出，“美国诉钟万益案”明确规定，只有敌人“占领”该国部分地区所生的子女才被剥夺出生公民身份，这意味着特朗普的政令不会适用于仅居住在美国境内的恐怖分子。她表示，特朗普政府可能会扩大合法定义的外交官范围，以排除更多人获得公民身份权，但解释说此举将难以起诉个人刑事犯罪，比尔也持有同样的担忧。
弗罗斯特和比尔都认为新的行政命令应被裁定违宪。
有人提出诉讼资格问题可能会给那些挑战特朗普政令的人带来潜在障碍。法律诉讼资格要求原告证明他们遭受了或即将面临由被告造成的具体伤害，且法院能够对此提供救济。
“看看究竟谁拥有挑战这项政令的诉讼资格，这会很有趣，”美国优先法律事务所联合创始人兼总裁吉恩·汉密尔顿告诉福克斯新闻数字频道。“是否有人认为自己会被归入外国恐怖组织的定义？如果有的话，看到他们试图起诉政府，或代表他们提起诉讼，那会相当有意思。”
特朗普的新政令已经面临法律阻力。
特朗普在“疯狂裁决”后请求最高法院重审公民身份权案件
示威者聚集在华盛顿特区最高法院外，声援公民身份权。唐纳德·特朗普总统的行政命令旨在缩小非居民在美国本土出生的子女的保护范围。拍摄于2025年5月15日。(肯特·西村/彭博社通过盖蒂图片社拍摄)
曾挑战其最初政令的同一批团体现在辩称，他的新政令非法创设了公民身份权例外，与最高法院6月的裁决相冲突。该政令仍在生效，但要到9月6日才会生效，马里兰州一名法官定于8月28日审理禁制令申请，新罕布什尔州也有相关动议待决。
与第一项新行政命令同日发布的第二项政令指示国务院和国土安全部，拒绝向被认为以生育旅游为目的入境的个人发放旅行签证，或对其启动驱逐程序。生育旅游是指非公民怀孕期间入境美国并分娩，以确保子女获得公民身份的行为。
汉密尔顿将第二项政令描述为拥有“坚实、可靠的法律基础”。
“它援引并依据《移民与国籍法》第215(a)条设定条件，并授权国务卿……确保我们不会向可能参与生育旅游的人发放签证或允许其持签证停留，”他解释道。“确定谁应该获得签证、谁不应该获得签证，是世界各国政府的主权权利和职责，美国当然也不例外。获得签证没有资格可言，也没有宪法规定的签证权利。”
参议员埃里克·施密特寻求终结生育旅游，撤销外国外交官子女的婴儿公民身份
特朗普9月在联合国为“美国优先”政策进行了全力辩护。()
批评人士还认为，政府已经有工具来打击生育旅游。自2020年以来，国务院的规则已指示领事官员，当有理由认为申请人的主要目的是赴美分娩并为子女获取公民身份时，拒绝发放旅游签证。
“联邦政府打击生育旅游经营者或拒绝欺诈性签证申请，不需要新的行政命令，”美国进步中心高级移民政策主任 Debu Gandhi 告诉福克斯新闻数字频道。“美国人应该注意到，从第一天起，特朗普政府就试图规避宪法中关于公民身份的明确无误的措辞，单方面决定谁生来就是美国人。”
如果政府的最新努力失败，进一步限制公民身份权的支持者可能会转向国会或寻求宪法修正案，这需要得到四分之三的州的批准。
夏皮罗表示，政府的立场“站得住脚”，但指出“如果他们最初就以这种更有针对性、更有限的方式推进”，最高法院可能最初不会否决他们的举措。
点击此处下载福克斯新闻应用程序
福克斯新闻数字频道周三联系白宫寻求置评，但未得到回应。
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/0c6f0cfb-14bb-41de-8dd1-fc95a4dd5768
Trump’s tougher round-two birthright citizenship strategy hinges on key legal distinction, experts say
2026-08-29 07:00:39 EDT / Fox News
The orders target children of foreign terrorist organization members and diplomats while also cracking down on birth tourism
By Robert Schmad Fox News
Published August 29, 2026 7:00am EDT
Legal experts say Trump’s new birthright citizenship push has stronger footing after Supreme Court setback
Scholars agree that the new batch of President Donald Trump’s executive orders touching on birthright citizenship raise novel legal questions.
NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!
Conservative legal experts say President Donald Trump’s latest attempts to narrow birthright citizenship and crack down on birth tourism may have stronger legal footing than his first effort.
After the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in June that children born in the United States to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present are citizens at birth under the 14th Amendment, Trump issued two new executive orders taking narrower approaches to citizenship and birth tourism.
The first, signed Aug. 6, directs federal agencies to withhold documents recognizing citizenship from certain children born when neither parent is a U.S. citizen, including some whose parents are members of designated foreign terrorist organizations, foreign-government employees or participants in transactions or fraud intended to obtain birthright citizenship.
Experts from the Manhattan Institute, America First Legal and the America First Policy Institute, all right-of-center organizations, argued that Trump’s new order is narrower than his first and is built around longstanding exceptions to birthright citizenship that they believe could apply here.
TRUMP SIGNS EXECUTIVE ORDERS TARGETING BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP, BIRTH TOURISM AFTER SUPREME COURT SETBACK
Olga Urbina and her 9-month-old son Ares Webster participate in a protest outside the Supreme Court over President Donald Trump’s move to end birthright citizenship on May 15, 2025.(Drew Angerer/AFP via Getty Images)
“The Supreme Court has long recognized that there are exceptions to the 14th Amendment’s birthright citizenship clause for the aliens who are considered children of invading armies or the children of ambassadors,” America First Policy Institute senior fellow Chad Mizelle, who previously served as the Justice Department’s chief of staff, told Fox News Digital. “So in a situation where you have a terrorist here contrary to the laws of the United States … who is looking to do harm … That has long been recognized by the Supreme Court, and basically going back to the history of our country, as recognized exceptions to any sort of claim of birthright citizenship.”
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, decided by the Supreme Court in 1898, recognized exceptions to birthright citizenship for children of diplomats and children of alien enemies born during a hostile occupation. Trump’s order argues that members of foreign terrorist organizations can fall within that enemy exception.
TRUMP BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP FIGHT COMES ROARING BACK WITH ‘INVADERS’ PLAY AFTER KAVANAUGH ROADMAP
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a press conference in the James S. Brady Briefing Room at the White House, on June 27, 2025, in Washington D.C., following a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that limits the application of birthright citizenship. (Photo by Mehmet Eser / Middle East Images via AFP)(Getty Images)
“The Supreme Court ruled that you can’t restrict birthright citizenship to kids of people in the country temporarily or illegally,” Manhattan Institute director of constitutional studies Ilya Shapiro told Fox News Digital. “But what the new executive order does is it goes to one of the classic exceptions to birthrights citizenship, two of the classic exceptions, those who owe an allegiance to a foreign government, meaning employed by a foreign governing diplomats otherwise, and those who are invaders of foreign armies and terrorists, members of foreign organizations hostile to America, certainly qualify in that category.”
David Bier, the director of immigration studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, however, argued that the president’s attempt to redefine what constitutes an alien enemy without going through Congress puts the administration on legally shaky ground.
“Congress ultimately establishes what it means to be subject to U.S. jurisdiction,” Bier told Fox News Digital. “There’s this very limited exception for accredited diplomats and everyone else in the United States is subject to U.S. laws so the idea that the president himself on his own authority can decide who is subject U. S. jurisdiction and U.S. laws is really a radical expansion and assertion of executive power and really would be unprecedented in the history of the United States.”
JACKSON ACCUSES THOMAS OF ECHOING INFAMOUSLY RACIST COURT DECISION IN BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP CLASH
The US Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on, April 1, 2026. President Donald Trump is fighting to end automatic citizenship for children born to parents who are in the country unlawfully or on temporary visas, part of his broader crackdown on undocumented immigrants and a change that could overturn more than a century of legal precedent.(Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
“I really do think this case is testing a different proposition from the earlier case,” Bier added, explaining that the issue at hand has more to do with executive power than birthright citizenship. “And I think it’s a lot more questionable as well.”
Amanda Frost, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, pointed out that United States v. Wong Kim Ark specifies that only children of enemies “occupying” some portion of the country are barred from citizenship at birth, meaning that Trump’s order would not apply to terrorists simply residing within the country. She said the Trump administration could potentially expand who is legally defined as a diplomat to preclude more people from birthright citizenship, but explained such a move would make it difficult to prosecute individuals for criminal offenses, a concern shared by Bier.
Frost and Bier both believe the new executive order should be ruled unconstitutional.
Some have floated the issue of standing as a potential problem for those looking to challenge Trump’s order. Legal standing requires plaintiffs to show they suffered or imminently face a concrete injury caused by the defendant that a court can remedy.
“It’s going to be interesting to see who actually does have standing to challenge this order,” America First Legal co-founder and president Gene Hamilton told Fox News Digital. “Is there somebody who thinks that they’re going to swept up in the definition of a foreign terrorist organization? And if so, it would be kind of fun to see them try to sue the government or have someone sue on their behalf.”
Trump’s new order is already facing legal resistance.
TRUMP TO ASK SUPREME COURT TO REHEAR BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP CASE AFTER ‘INSANE DECISION’
Demonstrators gather outside the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., in support of birthright citizenship. President Donald Trump’s executive order seeks to narrow protections for children born to non-residents on U.S. soil. Photo taken May 15, 2025.(Kent Nishimura/Bloomberg via Getty)
The same groups who challenged his initial order are now arguing that his new one unlawfully creates exceptions to birthright citizenship that conflict with the Supreme Court’s June ruling. The order remains on the books but is not scheduled to take effect until Sept. 6, with a Maryland judge scheduled to hear an injunction request Aug. 28 and a related motion still pending in New Hampshire.
Issued on the same day as the first new executive order, the second order directed the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security to deny travel visas to or pursue removal actions against individuals believed to be in the country for the purposes of birth tourism. Birth tourism is a process through which noncitizens enter the United States while pregnant and give birth in order to secure citizenship for their child.
Hamilton described this second order as being on “sound, solid legal footing.”
“It relies and invokes Section 215(a) of the INA to impose conditions and delegates authority of the Secretary of State … to ensure that we are not granting visas and allowing people to remain on visas who may be engaged in birth tourism,” he explained. “It is the sovereign right and province of all governments across the world, and certainly the United States is no different, to determine who should be able to receive a visa and who shouldn’t. There’s no entitlement to a visa. There’s no constitutional right to a visa.”
SEN ERIC SCHMITT SEEKS TO END BIRTH TOURISM, REVOKE CITIZENSHIP FOR BABIES OF FOREIGN DIPLOMATS
Trump gave a full-throated defense of “America First” at the U.N. in September.()
Critics also argue that the administration already had tools to combat birth tourism. Since 2020, State Department rules have directed consular officers to deny visitor visas when they have reason to believe an applicant’s primary purpose is traveling to the United States to give birth and obtain citizenship for the child.
“No new executive orders are required for the federal government to go after birth tourism operators or deny fraudulent visa applications,” Center for American Progress senior director of immigration policy Debu Gandhi told Fox News Digital. “Americans should take note that from day one, the Trump administration has tried to evade the Constitution’s clear and unequivocal language on citizenship and unilaterally decide who is born an American.”
If the administration’s latest effort fails, supporters of further limits on birthright citizenship could turn to Congress or pursue a constitutional amendment, which would require approval by three-fourths of the states.
Shapiro says that the administration is on “solid ground” but noted that “if they had proceeded originally in this more targeted, narrower way” then the Supreme Court may not have ruled against them originally.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The White House did not respond to a request for comment when reached by Fox News Digital on Wednesday.
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/0c6f0cfb-14bb-41de-8dd1-fc95a4dd5768
发表回复