A Republican bill with 5 Republican cosponsors · See all 5 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Citizenship Act of 2026 designates certain individuals as "invaders" to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act. These designated persons include those not lawfully admitted, those unlawfully present, and those seeking entry for birth tourism or commercial surrogacy. The bill seeks to exclude the children of these individuals from receiving birthright citizenship. Specifically, it targets children born to mothers who are unlawfully present or seeking admission for childbirth, provided the father is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. The Act also declares that courts cannot review the determination of an invasion.
Yes
- Scored +5
Does this tighten control of the border?
The bill strengthens border control by redefining legal status and targeting birth tourism.
- Scored +5
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill increases federal control over citizenship and limits judicial review of invasion determinations.
- Scored +3
Would white Americans be better off under this?
The bill's stated aims include protecting resources and jobs for United States citizens.
The opposite· 3 of 8
- Scored -10
Would immigrants be better off under this?
The bill drastically restricts citizenship rights and classifies large groups of migrants as invaders.
- Scored -8
Would children be better off under this?
The bill directly negatively impacts children by revoking their birthright citizenship based on their parents' status.
- Scored -8
Does this make it easier for immigrants already here to become citizens?
The bill actively removes birthright citizenship for specific groups, creating significant barriers to citizenship.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Reduction in Birth Tourism: By excluding those seeking admission for the purpose of giving birth to a child in the United States, the bill aims to target specific immigration practices (Section 3(a)(3)).
-
Addressing Surrogacy Practices: The bill designates individuals entering into commercial surrogacy contracts as invaders to address practices involving foreign nationals (Section 3(b)).
-
National Security and Economic Concerns: The findings suggest the bill addresses a "national security crisis" and aims to mitigate downstream consequences like increased housing prices and depressed wages (Section 2).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Loss of Birthright Citizenship: The bill excludes children born to "invaders" from receiving citizenship if their mother was not lawfully admitted or was unlawfully present and their father was not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident (Section 4(1)).
-
Impact on Birth Tourism Seekers: Individuals seeking admission or status specifically for the purpose of giving birth would be designated as invaders (Section 3(a)(3)).
-
Impact on Commercial Surrogacy: Nationals of covered nations entering into commercial surrogacy contracts for the purpose of having a child born in the U.S. would be designated as invaders (Section 3(b)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would white Americans be better off under this? — The bill's stated aims include protecting resources and jobs for United States citizens. Would immigrants be better off under this? — The bill drastically restricts citizenship rights and classifies large groups of migrants as invaders. Would children be better off under this? — The bill directly negatively impacts children by revoking their birthright citizenship based on their parents' status. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — The bill specifically targets immigration trends that disproportionately affect Hispanic/Latino populations. Would women be better off under this? — The bill targets women seeking admission for childbirth, impacting their reproductive and migratory choices. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — The bill targets commercial surrogacy, which the text notes has been used by certain foreign nationals, including those from China.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this tighten control of the border? — The bill strengthens border control by redefining legal status and targeting birth tourism. Does this make it easier for immigrants already here to become citizens? — The bill actively removes birthright citizenship for specific groups, creating significant barriers to citizenship. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The bill's targeting of specific demographics through the loss of birthright citizenship may negatively impact racial equity.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill increases federal control over citizenship and limits judicial review of invasion determinations. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill removes judicial review for invasion determinations, which significantly limits due process.
- 7/22/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 5 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Lauren BoebertRepublican · Colorado
Earl CarterRepublican · Georgia
Wesley HuntRepublican · Texas
Mary MillerRepublican · Illinois
Randy WeberRepublican · Texas