What happened
On August 6, 2026, President Trump signed two executive orders; both were published in the Federal Register on August 11. The first, Executive Order 14418, “Continuing To Protect the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” came five weeks after the Supreme Court’s June 30 decision in Trump v. Barbara, which held that children born in the United States to parents “unlawfully or temporarily present” are “citizens at birth” under the Fourteenth Amendment. The order says it “identifies, non-exhaustively, and prescribes action concerning certain categories of children of aliens who do not fall within the rule of birthright citizenship as announced by the Supreme Court.” Its policy is that no federal agency will issue documents recognizing citizenship for, or accept state or local documents recognizing citizenship of, a person “when neither parent of that person is a citizen” and one of four things applies: either parent is an “alien enemy,” which the order defines to include members of a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization or a Specially Designated Global Terrorist; either parent is a “foreign government employee,” defined to include ambassadors, nationals of a foreign country working at its embassy or consulate, people employed by a foreign government “in an official capacity,” and staff of international organizations who have immunity; either parent “engaged in a commercial transaction to purchase or access birthright citizenship for the person,” including paying for the mother to be in the United States to give birth or paying a surrogate here, or “engaged in fraudulent activity to obtain citizenship”; or the person was born in a U.S. territory or territorial waters “where citizenship is not conferred by Federal statute.” It directs the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Commissioner of Social Security to bring their rules in line, and every agency to publish implementation guidance within 30 days.
The second, Executive Order 14419, “Ending Birth Tourism,” is about visas, not citizenship documents. It defines birth tourism as “the entry of any foreign national into the United States via a nonimmigrant visa for the purpose of giving birth on American soil,” or any effort by a foreign national to help someone do that, and delegates the President’s authority under section 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security. It lists what they “may” do: refuse a visa or entry, revoke a visa and “permanently” bar entry, deny entry to or remove anyone who “previously engaged or plans to engage in birth tourism,” and act against facilitators inside or outside the country. Section 5 lets either Secretary exempt a person “on humanitarian grounds” or when entry is in the national interest. The State Department has moved on it. On August 12 it announced a Birth Tourism Prevention Task Force and said it had been “revoking more than 600 visas from foreign nationals across the globe.” On September 23, Secretary Rubio announced a visa restriction policy under INA section 212(a)(3)(C) aimed at people who “knowingly engage in, have engaged in, or facilitate birth tourism,” naming operators of commercial networks, visa “fixers” and foreign medical providers, and added: “Certain family members may also be covered by these restrictions.”
On September 2, 2026, Judge Deborah L. Boardman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, in CASA, Inc. v. Trump (Civ. No. DLB-25-201), issued a preliminary injunction against Executive Order 14418. It bars the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of USCIS, the Commissioner of Social Security and their staff “from enforcing or applying the 2026 Executive Order against the class representatives and the members of the certified class and from taking any other action to interfere with, deny, or fail to recognize the citizenship of any member of the certified class until further order of this Court.” Her opinion calls the order “almost certainly unconstitutional as applied to the certified class” because “the Supreme Court in Barbara already decided that the children in the class are citizens at birth.” Two limits are written into the order itself: the court did not enjoin the territories provision, Section 2(d), because “by its terms, Section 2(d) does not threaten the citizenship of any class member,” and it allowed the agencies to keep writing the public guidance the order calls for. The court’s August 7, 2025 injunction against the earlier citizenship order also remains in effect. Executive Order 14419 was not part of this case.
Who this is about
Executive Order 14418 speaks of “persons” with no citizen parent who fall into one of its four situations. It gives no birth date: it does not say whether it reaches only children born after August 6, 2026, or people born earlier, and the Maryland court read it, “by its plain language,” as applying “to all children who meet its criteria—regardless of when they were born.” The court’s injunction protects the certified class, which the opinion defines as: “Any child who has been born or will be born in the United States after February 19, 2025, (1) whose mother was unlawfully present in the United States and whose father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) whose mother’s presence in the United States at the time of said person’s birth was lawful but temporary and whose father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.” A child born here to a mother with no status or on a temporary visa, and a father who is neither a citizen nor a permanent resident, is inside that definition.
Executive Order 14419 is about foreign nationals who use, or help others use, a temporary visa to come and give birth. It does not say how a consular or border officer decides that someone traveled “for the purpose of giving birth,” which visa categories it reaches, or what happens to a pregnant traveler who has another purpose. It says nothing about the citizenship of a child who has already been born. And neither order mentions people who hold a green card, or children with a U.S.-citizen parent.
What it does not mean
- It does not mean birthright citizenship ended. On June 30, 2026 the Supreme Court held that children born here to parents “unlawfully or temporarily present” are “citizens at birth.” Executive Order 14418 itself says it is describing categories outside that rule; whether its categories really are outside it is what the court case is about.
- It does not mean Executive Order 14418 is being applied to the children of undocumented or temporary-visa parents. The Maryland court has barred the federal government from enforcing it against the certified class “until further order of this Court.”
- It does not mean the matter is closed. A preliminary injunction lasts while the case continues, the government may appeal it, and the court left Section 2(d) and the agencies’ guidance work untouched.
- It does not mean the birth-tourism order is blocked. Executive Order 14419 was not before the Maryland court, and the State Department is acting under it: a task force, revoked visas and, as of September 23, a visa restriction policy.
What to do with this
If your child was born in the United States after February 19, 2025 and neither parent is a citizen or a permanent resident, or if you are planning to travel to the United States on a visa while pregnant, this is a moment to talk to a licensed immigration attorney or a DOJ-accredited representative before you act on anything you hear. They can read the two orders and the court’s order against your family’s own facts, including whether the certified class covers your child. The organizations below are a place to start.
Advocasí is not a law firm. We explain what a policy says and help people prepare their own paperwork once a qualified advisor has told them which path applies.