On August 6, 2026, President Trump signed two executive orders on “birth tourism”—the practice of traveling to the U.S. to give birth so a child is born a citizen. One order targets the travel itself. The other narrows which children of noncitizens qualify for automatic citizenship.

Below: what changed, who it hits, and what to do if it touches you.

‍

A quick primer on birthright citizenship

Six weeks before these orders, on June 30, 2026, the Supreme Court decided Trump v. Barbara. The Court held that children born in the U.S. to parents who are undocumented or here temporarily are citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment, and struck down Trump's 2025 executive order that tried to end birthright citizenship broadly. The administration lost that fight. The August 6 orders are its next move, built on narrower ground the Court didn't foreclose.

‍
Who this actually affects

• Pregnant travelers applying for or holding a B-1/B-2 visitor visa. Expect tougher consular interviews and closer questioning at the border about the purpose of your trip.
• Foreign nationals already in the U.S. on a valid visa who are pregnant or planning to give birth. The birth tourism order reaches people already inside the country, not just visa applicants abroad—more below.
• Children of foreign government or embassy staff born in the U.S. Excluded from automatic citizenship by name—a long-recognized, narrow exception.
• Children of parents the order classifies as “alien enemies,” including members of designated foreign terrorist organizations. Also excluded by name; a narrow, specific carve-out.
• Anyone whose child's citizenship could later be characterized as obtained through a “commercial transaction” or “fraudulent activity.” This is the broadest category, and the one most likely to reach international intended parents using U.S. gestational surrogacy—compensated arrangements are an easy target for that label even where nothing unlawful occurred.
• Children born in certain U.S. territories to noncitizen parents. The order applies the same exclusion to territories, such as American Samoa, where citizenship isn't automatically conferred by federal statute the way it is in the states.
• Agencies and businesses that facilitate birth-tourism travel. The order calls out facilitating businesses for enforcement attention.
• Who this does NOT affect: U.S. citizens, and the vast majority of children already born on U.S. soil—more on that below.
  ‍

What the new orders actually do

The administration issued two executive orders on August 6, 2026. One targets travel; the other targets citizenship eligibility. Here is each, in plain terms.

‍
Order 1: “Ending Birth Tourism”

This order defines “birth tourism” as entering the U.S. on a nonimmigrant visa to give birth here, or helping someone else do so. It directs the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security to update rules and guidance to stop that entry. The order authorizes three specific actions:

• Revoke the visa or travel authorization of anyone who enters or attempts to enter for birth tourism, and permanently bar their reentry.
• Deny entry to anyone suspected of planning birth tourism, at the border or at a consulate.
• Remove anyone already in the U.S. who previously engaged in birth tourism or plans to, even if they hold a valid visa.

The order allows exceptions on humanitarian grounds or when entry serves the national interest, and leaves the Secretaries discretion to grant them. It names no specific countries and sets no visa-processing pause.

‍
Order 2: “Continuing to Protect the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship”

This order narrows birthright citizenship. It applies only when neither parent is a U.S. citizen, and it lists four categories of children the administration will no longer treat as automatically entitled to citizenship:

• (a) Alien enemies. Either parent is an “alien enemy,” a term the order defines to include members of a designated foreign terrorist organization.
• (b) Foreign government employees. Either parent works for a foreign government—ambassadors, embassy or consular staff, or international-organization staff with diplomatic immunity.
• (c) Commercial transactions or fraud. Either parent “engaged in a commercial transaction to purchase or access birthright citizenship,” or “engaged in fraudulent activity to obtain citizenship.”
• (d) Certain territories. The child is born in a U.S. territory or territorial waters where citizenship is not conferred by federal statute.

The order directs the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Commissioner of Social Security to issue public implementation guidance within 30 days—by roughly September 5, 2026.

‍
Categories (a), (b), and (d) are narrow and track exceptions courts have recognized for well over a century. Category (c) is different. It is undefined, broadly worded, and does most of the legal work in this order—which is exactly why it carries the most legal risk. Nothing about a lawful, compensated surrogacy arrangement is fraud in the ordinary sense, but a category worded this loosely gives an agency room to stretch it toward one.

‍
Why category (c) is vulnerable

Rather than directly challenging Barbara, the administration is trying to carve out narrower exceptions to birthright citizenship. Both the “fraudulent activity” and “commercial transaction” provisions are likely to be tested in court. The “commercial transaction” provision may face greater scrutiny because its broad wording could reach lawful conduct, including compensated gestational surrogacy, which is legal in California and many other states, is openly regulated, and is typically disclosed in a court-approved parentage order. Until the courts provide more guidance, families should not assume these provisions will ultimately be upheld or enforced exactly as written.

‍
How common is birth tourism, really?

CDC data counted roughly 9,600 births in 2024 to foreign mothers who listed an address outside the U.S. The broadest census-based estimate, cited by the Migration Policy Institute, runs to 22,000–26,000 a year; a 2026 Penn State research brief lands lower, at 5,000 to just under 10,000. No federal agency tracks birth tourism directly, and every one of these figures is a small fraction of the roughly 3.6 million annual U.S. births. Most pregnant travelers are not birth tourists, but the screening described below does not reliably separate the two groups. That gap between the order's stated purpose and its likely effect is exactly where wrongful denials happen—and exactly where they can be challenged. This also is not a new approach: a 2020 State Department regulation made visitor-visa applicants ineligible where a consular officer concludes the primary purpose of travel is to give birth in the U.S., so there is a track record to draw on when defending clients against it.

‍
What this looks like in practice

• Tougher questions at the consulate. Visitor-visa applicants already carry the burden of proving nonimmigrant intent under INA § 214(b). Expect more probing questions about pregnancy, medical plans, and ties home.
• A misrepresentation finding, not just a denial. Concealing your real purpose of travel can trigger a finding under INA § 212(a)(6)(C). That finding creates a lifetime bar, far harder to fix than a simple refusal.
• A visa revoked later, or entry denied at the border. A visa is not a guarantee of entry. The government can revoke one under INA § 221(i). CBP can still turn you away, or send you to secondary inspection, even with a valid visa in hand.
• Removal, for people already in the U.S. Order 1 authorizes removal of people already here on a valid visa if they are found to have engaged in birth tourism. This is broader than a visa-desk problem.
  ‍

A note for intended parents

If you're pursuing U.S. surrogacy from abroad, watch category (c) closely. It could complicate a passport or Social Security number application for your child, even though parentage orders are typically confidential and standard birth certificates don't disclose surrogacy. Given Barbara, this piece of the order looks vulnerable to challenge.

‍
Executive orders cannot override the Constitution or Supreme Court precedent. Whether category (c) can lawfully narrow birthright citizenship will ultimately be decided by the courts. But intended parents and any family members traveling on visitor visas should still plan around the heightened screening described above, and should not assume the citizenship question will resolve itself.

‍
What to do now

• Never misrepresent your purpose of travel. A misrepresentation finding is worse than a denial—it can follow you for life. Answering honestly, with counsel's guidance, is your best protection.
• Pregnant and holding a visitor visa? Get advice before you fly. Timing and documentation matter more now than a year ago.
• Your U.S.-born child is still a citizen. Barbara protects the vast majority of children born here. A wrongful denial of a passport or Social Security number is not final—challenge it.
• Facilitating businesses should get ahead of this. Review your model with counsel before an investigation starts, not after.
• Watch the courts, not the headlines. Both orders will likely be challenged. Enforcement could shift quickly, and today's denial may not reflect where the law lands.
  ‍

How the Law Offices of Sabrina Li can help

A Supreme Court ruling and two new executive orders in the span of six weeks. If you're pregnant, planning U.S. travel, pursuing international surrogacy, or concerned about how these orders affect your family, consult an experienced immigration attorney before you make travel or visa decisions—not after a denial.

‍
We help clients with:

• Consultations on how these orders apply to your specific situation.
• Travel strategy for pregnant travelers and international families planning U.S. trips.
• Inadmissibility analysis if you're facing a § 214(b) denial or a misrepresentation finding.
• Visa planning for intended parents, surrogates, and family members involved in a U.S. surrogacy journey.

Contact the Law Offices of Sabrina Li by phone on our general line at (213) 375-8096 or on our Chinese-language hotline at (626) 800-4820, by email at csteam@sabrinali.law, or learn more about our immigration practice at sabrinali.law.

‍
Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. How courts will ultimately rule on these orders was not known at the time of writing and may change. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice on your particular circumstances, consult a qualified immigration attorney.