Washington, April 2 A US Supreme Court case on birthright citizenship has raised concerns among Indian professionals on H-1B visas and other temporary permits.
The Trump administration told the court that children born to “temporary visitors” may not automatically be US citizens.
Solicitor General John Sauer said the Constitution requires “direct and immediate allegiance” to the United States, not just birth on its soil.
He argued that children of people on temporary visas do not meet that test.
That position could affect thousands of Indian families. Indians form the largest group of H-1B visa holders in the US.
Many live in the country for years while waiting for green cards. They build careers and raise families. Their children are often born in the US and treated as citizens under the current law.
The government’s argument challenges that long-standing practice.
Sauer said the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” should be read as requiring allegiance tied to lawful residence.
He said the rule should not apply to those who are in the country only temporarily.
Several justices questioned how such a policy would work.
They asked how officials would determine a child’s citizenship at birth. They also asked if parents’ immigration status would need to be checked in each case.
The government said the system would rely on “objectively verifiable” immigration data.
That suggests visa status could decide whether a child is a citizen.
Lawyers opposing the administration warned that the move would overturn settled law.
They pointed to the 1898 ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark. That case held that most children born in the US are citizens, regardless of their parents’ status.
They said the Constitution creates a clear rule. “Everyone born here is a citizen alike,” counsel told the court.
For Indian families, the stakes are high.
H-1B visa holders often face long delays in getting permanent residency. During that time, their US-born children enjoy full citizenship rights.
A change in the law could create uncertainty. It could affect access to education, jobs and government benefits.
The court also discussed whether any ruling would apply only in the future.
The government said its policy would be prospective. But challengers warned that the logic could put the status of many people in doubt.
The case comes as immigration remains a key political issue in the US.
The administration argued that current rules act as a “pull factor” for illegal immigration.
The 14th Amendment, adopted in 1868, grants citizenship to all persons born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction. It was meant to ensure citizenship for freed slaves after the Civil War.
For more than a century, the US has followed a broad birthright citizenship rule.
The court’s decision could reshape that principle and have direct consequences for Indian professionals and their families.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor