Marco Rubio Targets Birth Tourism With Mass Visa Revocations, Ignoring the Irony of His Own Family History
A full-blown task force.
Marco Rubio just revoked over 600 visas as part of a sweeping crackdown on birth tourism, a move that’s sparking debate about immigration policy and the irony of his own family’s story. According to Newsweek, the Secretary of State announced the enforcement effort on X, framing it as a fight against networks that exploit U.S. immigration laws to sell American citizenship.
“American citizenship is not for sale,” Rubio declared. He accused organized groups of helping foreign nationals travel to the U.S. specifically to give birth on American soil so their children automatically become citizens. The State Department’s new Birth Tourism Prevention Task Force has already gone after hundreds of foreign nationals worldwide in its first month, revoking visas and targeting networks that allegedly facilitate birth tourism.
Rubio didn’t hold back in his statement, calling these operations “elaborate birth tourism rings” that profit from coaching foreigners to defraud the visa system, arranging travel and housing, and even forging documents. The goal, he said, is to “dismantle birth tourism networks and defend the integrity of U.S. citizenship.”
Here’s where things get murky
Rubio’s own parents weren’t U.S. citizens when he was born in Miami in 1971. He became a citizen under the same Fourteenth Amendment principle that guarantees birthright citizenship to nearly all children born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents’ immigration status.
When his presidential eligibility was challenged in 2016, his legal team argued that his birth in the U.S. made him a natural-born citizen under English common law, Supreme Court precedent, and the 14th Amendment. That argument aligns with the longstanding legal understanding of birthright citizenship, but it’s at odds with the broader theory pushed by the current administration.
The administration’s stance on birth tourism doesn’t seek to change the constitutional protection of birthright citizenship itself. Instead, it’s targeting individuals accused of fraud or deception to obtain visas for the purpose of giving birth in the U.S.
Colleen Putzel-Kavanaugh, an associate policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute, explained that the issue lies with the intent behind the travel and the actions of the companies involved. She said, “Giving birth on U.S. territory is not inherently illegal, but coming to the U.S. intentionally to give birth and the actions of the companies that Rubio describes, like visa fraud, are crimes.”
What does the term ‘birth tourist’ mean?
A ‘birth tourist’ is someone who comes to the U.S. solely to give birth, resulting in U.S. citizenship for their child. This is different from scenarios like Rubio’s birth or births to unauthorized parents, though all fall under the umbrella of birthright citizenship. One challenge in addressing birth tourism is the lack of clear data.
Jeremy Beck, co-president of NumbersUSA, which advocates for immigration reform, framed birth tourism as a threat to the integrity of birthright citizenship. “Birth tourism undermines the integrity of birthright citizenship as asylum shopping undermines our humanitarian programs,” he said.
Beck added, “Like most countries, the United States grants automatic citizenship to the U.S.-born children of American citizens and legal permanent residents. But the U.S. and Canada are the only two developed economies to extend that to the children of tourists,” he said.
The legal landscape around birthright citizenship has been contentious, especially in recent years. Just weeks before Rubio’s announcement, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Trump v. Barbara that children born in the U.S. to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present in the country are citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment.
The ruling rejected the administration’s earlier attempt to limit birthright citizenship, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing that there was “scant evidence for this dramatically revisionist view.” The decision was a major setback for the administration.
It’s not backing down though
Beck argued that the decision means “anyone who can successfully lie to an immigration agent must be rewarded with a U.S.-citizen child,” making it even more critical to stop birth tourism before entry. The State Department’s current policy, in place since January 2020, instructs consular officers to deny visitor visas if they believe the applicant’s primary purpose is to give birth in the U.S. for citizenship.
The new task force takes this policy further by centralizing enforcement efforts. It’s about retrospectively examining visa holders’ travel histories, revoking visas, coordinating with the Department of Homeland Security, and focusing on commercial facilitators and networks. Putzel-Kavanaugh noted that past administrations have largely focused on criminal investigations into birth tourism companies. The current effort appears to be an expansion of this.
Beck believes lawmakers need to take stronger action by enacting new legislation. He pointed to bills like S. 5023 by Senator Marsha Blackburn and H.R. 9919 by Representative Rich McCormick, which would explicitly make tourists inadmissible if their intent is to have a baby for citizenship purposes.
“The Obama Administration focused enforcement almost exclusively on maternity hotels like You Win that coached clients on how to commit fraud, while the Trump Administration gave more leeway to consular officers abroad in 2020 to disrupt birth tourism,” he said. “The Biden Administration left that Trump policy in place, but Congress needs to codify the rules.”
(Featured image: Presidential Communications Office)
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
Follow The Mary Sue:
