2026年7月13日 美国东部时间9:30 / 福克斯新闻
班克斯援引黄锦兴案例外条款，拒绝向生育游客和非法移民子女赋予出生公民权
作者：查尔斯·克赖茨，福克斯新闻
全新功能：您现在可以收听福克斯新闻文章！
独家报道： 就在上月最高法院裁决对唐纳德·特朗普总统就此问题发布的行政令造成打击后，参议员吉姆·班克斯将于周一提出一项立法，旨在通过将非法移民子女和生育游客定义为联邦法律中的“入侵者”，终结他们的出生公民权。
印第安纳州共和党议员班克斯在6月30日接受《人类事件》采访时回忆称，特朗普近期敦促参议院共和党人加快推进其立法议程，包括终结出生公民权，并告诉他们“斗争得不够努力”。
班克斯告诉福克斯新闻数字频道，他计划在周一下午参议院复会后立即提出《公民身份法案》，该法案的起草参考了特朗普任命的大法官布雷特·卡瓦诺在上月“特朗普诉芭芭拉”案中的协同意见。
卡瓦诺在判决中附议了判决结果，但在部分内容上持异议，他表示特朗普的行政令与联邦出生公民权法律冲突，但暗示国会可以修改该法规以创设新的例外条款。
特朗普的“英雄”大法官在最高法院驳回出生公民权行政令后提供行动路线图
《公民身份法案》将宣布，法定“入侵者”的子女无权根据法律获得出生公民权，并将援引该术语的2025年行政令编入法典。
在法案摘要中，班克斯的法案宣称“任何未经授权进入美国或为生育旅游目的进入美国的人都被视为入侵者……”，并修订《移民和国籍法》，将此类“入侵者”的子女排除在外。
班克斯对“入侵者”一词的关键使用援引了特朗普的行政令，该行政令将穿越南部边境的非法移民定性为“入侵”，而法案指出，“芭芭拉案”裁决为国会采取打击行动留出了这条途径。
《公民身份法案》不会触及宪法修正案程序，也不会试图推翻任何法院裁决，而是将特朗普的“入侵”定性编入法典，并修订联邦法律，根据“芭芭拉案”多数派作为先例援引的例外条款，剥夺非法移民子女和生育游客子女的出生公民权。
参议员莫雷诺推动国会利用哈里·里德1993年立法澄清出生公民权规则
（左图：最高法院；右图：参议员吉姆·班克斯。(李锐/盖蒂图片社；安德鲁·哈尼克；盖蒂图片社)）
卡瓦诺认定，特朗普的行政令并未违反第14修正案，但确实与一部旨在落实该修正案的联邦出生公民权法律冲突，保守派称该修正案主要是为解放奴隶及其子女制定的。
由乔治·W·布什任命的首席大法官约翰·罗伯茨援引1898年具有里程碑意义的“美国诉黄锦兴案”，在“芭芭拉案”中裁定特朗普败诉，并“保障所有在美国出生且受其管辖的儿童获得公民身份”——但班克斯的法案将援引同一判例作为先例，以终结非法移民子女和生育游客子女的出生公民权。
共和党总统切斯特·阿瑟任命的大法官霍勒斯·格雷在“黄锦兴案”中裁定，这些例外情况包括外交官子女、“境内敌人”以及那些在美国领土进行敌对占领、“无需对被入侵领土的主权者[美国政府]效忠”的人。
“大规模生育武器”：监督机构在最高法院裁决后公布遏制生育旅游行动计划
通过罗伯茨援引“黄锦兴案”及其例外条款的先例，班克斯的法案本质上将利用该判例本身来反对其原有立场。
“最高法院关于出生公民权的裁决是对美国主权的前所未有的攻击，我们必须尽一切努力拯救我们的国家，”班克斯告诉福克斯新闻数字频道。
“我提出《公民身份法案》，以扭转这一具有重大影响的裁决的影响，确保数百万入侵我国的非法移民无法继续利用我们的移民体系。”
在2025年另一桩不利于特朗普的类似案件“美国诉CASA”中，奥巴马任命的大法官索尼娅·索托马约尔单独确认，“敌对占领期间外国敌人所生的子女”不具备获得出生公民权的资格，但并未进一步将非法移民归类为原裁决中提及的此类“入侵者”。
班克斯还在法案中提出了文本宪法层面的论点，称第四条要求联邦政府“保护每个州免受入侵”，而国会根据第一条的权力包括“制定统一的归化规则”。
他还援引了詹姆斯·麦迪逊1788年的分析，即宪法将通过统一全国规则管理归化的权力授予国会，而非各州。
订阅获取政治新闻通讯
（2026年4月1日，华盛顿特区，示威者在美国最高法院外集会支持出生公民权。(曼德尔·恩根/盖蒂图片社)）
《公民身份法案》指出，一些墨西哥国民将向北移民视为重新夺回美国在19世纪40年代军事冲突中获得的领土的手段，1848年的《瓜达卢佩-伊达尔戈条约》最终确定了得克萨斯州及其他地区为美国领土。
点击此处下载福克斯新闻应用程序
该法案还指出，中国的生育旅游直接受到中共鼓励，这让出生公民权的辩论完整地回到了“敌对政府入侵”的定义问题上。
班克斯的法案认为，这些例子表明，出生公民权已与更广泛的国家主权和外国影响力问题交织在一起。
作者在宾夕法尼亚州艾伦敦出生并长大，自2013年起为福克斯新闻在纽约和华盛顿分社工作。
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6399484842112
Trump birthright citizenship fight comes roaring back with ‘invaders’ play after Kavanaugh roadmap
July 13, 2026 9:30am EDT / Fox News
Banks uses Wong Kim Ark exceptions to deny birthright citizenship to birth tourists and children of illegal immigrants
By Charles Creitz, Fox News
NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!
EXCLUSIVE: Sen. Jim Banks will introduce legislation Monday aimed at ending birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants and birth tourists by defining them as children of “invaders” under federal law after a Supreme Court ruling last month dealt a setback to President Donald Trump’s executive order on the issue.
Trump recently urged Senate Republicans to move faster on his legislative agenda, including ending birthright citizenship, telling them they were “not fighting hard enough,” Banks, R-Ind., recalled in a June 30 interview with Human Events.
Banks told Fox News Digital he plans to introduce the Citizenship Act as soon as the Senate opens for business Monday afternoon – crafting it with a nod to Trump-appointed Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s concurrence in last month’s Trump v. Barbara case.
Kavanaugh, concurring in the judgment and dissenting in part, said Trump’s order conflicted with federal birthright citizenship law but suggested Congress could amend that statute to create new exceptions.
TRUMP’S ‘HERO’ JUSTICE OFFERS ROADMAP AFTER SUPREME COURT REJECTS BIRTHRIGHT ORDER
The Citizenship Act would declare that children of statutory “invaders” are not entitled to birthright citizenship under the law and codify a 2025 executive order that cites the term.
In its summary, Banks’ bill declares “any person who enters the United States without authorization or for the purpose of engaging in birth tourism is considered an invader…” and amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to exclude children of such “invaders.”
Banks’ key use of “invaders” cites Trump’s executive order declaring illegal immigration across the southern border an “invasion,” while the bill notes the Barbara decision leaves that avenue open for Congress to crack down on.
Without touching the constitutional amendment process or attempting to overturn any court ruling, the Citizenship Act will codify Trump’s declaration of “invasion” and amend federal law to revoke birthright citizenship from children of illegal immigrants under exceptions listed in the same case the Barbara ruling’s majority used as its precedent.
SEN MORENO PUSHES CONGRESS TO CLARIFY BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP RULES USING HARRY REID’S OWN 1993 LEGISLATION
The Supreme Court, left; Sen. Jim Banks, right.(Li Rui/Getty Images; Andrew Harnik; Getty Images)
Kavanaugh found that Trump’s order didn’t violate the 14th Amendment but did conflict with a federal statute on birthright citizenship passed in the spirit of the amendment conservatives said was intended mainly for freed slaves and their children
Chief Justice John Roberts, appointed by George W. Bush, relied on the landmark 1898 U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark case to rule against Trump in Barbara and “guarantee citizenship to all children born in the United States and subject to its power” – but Banks’ bill would use that same case as precedent to secure an end to birthright citizenship for progeny of illegal immigrants and birth tourists.
Justice Horace Gray – an appointee of Republican President Chester Arthur – ruled in Wong Kim Ark that those exceptions include diplomats’ kids, “enemies within” and those engaged in hostile occupation of U.S. territories who are not “bound to render obedience to the sovereign [U.S. government] whose domains are being invaded.”
‘WEAPONS OF MASS REPRODUCTION’: WATCHDOG UNVEILS ACTION PLAN TO CURB BIRTH TOURISM AFTER SUPREME COURT RULING
By Roberts reaffirming Wong Kim Ark’s precedent with its exceptions, Banks’ bill would essentially use it against itself.
“The Supreme Court’s birthright citizenship decision was an unprecedented assault on American sovereignty, and we must do whatever it takes to save our country,” Banks told Fox News Digital.
“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.”
In U.S. v. CASA, a similar 2025 case that went against Trump, Obama-appointed Justice Sonia Sotomayor separately confirmed “children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation” do not qualify for birthright citizenship, while not taking the extra step to classify illegal immigrants as such “invaders” mentioned in the original ruling.
Banks also makes a textual constitutional argument in his bill, writing that Article IV requires the feds to “protect each [state] [against invasion]” while Congress’ Article I power includes “establish[ing] a [uniform rule of naturalization].”
He also cited James Madison’s 1788 analysis that the Constitution vested Congress – not the states – with authority over naturalization through a uniform national rule.
SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER
Demonstrators rally in support of birthright citizenship outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on April 1, 2026.(Mandel Ngan/Getty Images)
The Citizenship Act lays out that some Mexican nationals view migration northward as a means of re-conquering territory the U.S. won during 1840s military hostilities finalized in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848 that established Texas and beyond as part of the U.S.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
It also points to Chinese birth tourism being encouraged directly by the CCP – which brings the birthright citizenship debate over what defines an invasion by a hostile government full circle.
Banks’ bill argues those examples demonstrate that birthright citizenship has become intertwined with broader questions of national sovereignty and foreign influence.
Born and raised in Allentown, Pennsylvania, worked in both the New York and Washington bureaus for Fox News since 2013.
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6399484842112