During an interview with Politico, President Donald Trump attempted to explain the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. But his latest interpretation of American history had us fact-checking in real time.
Donald Trump has long sought to end birthright citizenship. The issue is now before the Supreme Court, which on December 5 agreed to hear arguments in a case stemming from an executive order Trump signed after returning to office in January. That order seeks to deny automatic U.S. citizenship to children born in the United States and would apply to children of undocumented immigrants or tourists.
Federal and appeals courts have been blocking this order and citing precedent and the language of the Constitution. But Donald Trump has brushed aside more than a century of legal interpretation with a controversial claim.
Trump on birthright citizenship:
“That 14th Amendment case was for the babies of slaves, NOT for some rich foreigner flying in, dropping a kid on US soil, and instantly making their entire family American citizens. We’re ending this ridiculous loophole!”pic.twitter.com/oncDVJY8T5
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) December 9, 2025
According to him, the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment was only:
“Meant for the babies of slaves.”
Donald Trump then added:
“If you look at the dates on the case, it was exactly having to do with the Civil War.”
He went on to say birthright citizenship was never designed for a “rich person coming from another country” who enters the U.S. and secures citizenship for their family. The problem is that the text and history of the 14th Amendment say otherwise.
Passed by Congress in 1866 and ratified in 1868, the amendment states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” That was reinforced by the Supreme Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), which held that children born to immigrant parents are citizens regardless of their parents’ immigration status. There are narrow exceptions, such as the children of foreign diplomats only.
On social media, people started berating Donald Trump again. “That’s so interesting bc his mother was not a slave, and neither were two of his three wives that he had children with. Why do reporters not FACT CHECK HIM?” one wrote.
Another added, “His stupidity knows no low.” Critics also pointed out that both Ivana Trump (his first wife) and Melania Trump (the current First Lady) became naturalized U.S. citizens after immigrating from Europe. Plus, Melania’s parents gained citizenship in 2018 through family-based immigration.
That system is “chain migration,” Trump now says.
MELANIA TRUMP WORKED ILLEGALLY IN THE US AS A MODEL, WITHOUT A VISA,IN 1996.
(Sources Associated Press.)
HOW SHE OBTAINED A GREEN CARD IS STILL A MYSTERY.
(Sources Wasington Post.)
HER PARENTS FOLLOWED HER TO THE USA, THROUGH SO-CALLED CHAIN MIGRATION.
(Source: Huffington Post.) pic.twitter.com/hjxAPOTdk9
— Michele🧑🎄🎄🆘Save Gaza🇵🇸 & UA🇺🇦🆘⛄️🎄 (@RadarResist) November 15, 2025
One Threads user referenced Trump’s own immigration proposals: “‘Not meant for some rich person coming from another country…and then all of a sudden the whole family becomes American citizens’ ISN’T THIS GUY SELLING AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP FOR $5M?!?!” this alludes to Trump’s idea of a “Gold Card” or “Platinum Card” visa program that would allow wealthy foreigners to pay up to $5 million for a pathway to U.S. residency and even citizenship. But if birthright citizenship were eliminated, even children born in the US to such visa holders could be denied citizenship unless the Supreme Court sides with Trump.
The high court’s ruling hinges on how it interprets the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” and is expected by June. The administration argues that people who are in the US temporarily are not fully subject to its jurisdiction.
Either way, Donald Trump’s constitutional lesson has done its damage.
