Outlet reports Trump signed new executive orders to restrict birthright citizenship and target “birth tourism”

President Donald Trump has signed two executive orders described by The Hill as aimed at limiting birthright citizenship and targeting so-called “birth tourism,” the outlet reported Thursday. The report framed the moves as a response to a recent Supreme Court decision that upheld automatic constitutional citizenship for children born on U.S. soil, despite an earlier Trump administration effort to end that practice.

The Hill said the administration’s prior “Day 1” executive order sought to end automatic birthright citizenship for all children born in the United States. According to the outlet, the Supreme Court rejected that approach in late June. In Thursday’s reporting, The Hill said the new orders are intended to address the Supreme Court’s reasoning by narrowing the policy’s scope rather than eliminating birthright citizenship across the board.

The reported executive orders were also described by The Hill as focused on children born to noncitizens, with the administration concentrating on cases it links to people traveling to the United States specifically to give birth. The outlet said the orders would create additional limits and mechanisms intended to prevent what the administration calls circumvention of birthright citizenship.

Because the central claims in the Thursday report involve executive action and a Supreme Court outcome, Apex Times is not yet able to confirm the details from a White House release, Federal Register notice, or Supreme Court document. Absent an official record, Apex Times will treat the actions and their precise provisions as outlet-reported rather than independently verified.

If implemented as described, the practical effect would be to increase scrutiny for birth records and citizenship determinations in situations the administration categorizes as “birth tourism,” potentially affecting how federal agencies and officials process citizenship eligibility and related documentation. Such changes would likely concentrate on enforcement and administrative procedures, including how agencies assess eligibility claims and what evidence or thresholds they require for certain birth-related benefits.

The Supreme Court’s late-June decision, as characterized by The Hill, is already an important constraint on the federal government’s ability to alter citizenship outcomes by executive order alone. Legal disputes would likely turn on whether the new orders operate within constitutional and statutory limits, and on whether any administrative criteria they impose are consistent with existing federal laws on citizenship transmission and the handling of birth records.

The Hill reported the executive orders were signed on Thursday. Next steps would include locating the underlying White House text or any Federal Register publication that describes the orders’ requirements, effective dates, and implementation instructions for relevant agencies, as well as any litigation that follows if courts are asked to review the policy’s legality and scope.