Latest news with #immigrantmothers
Yahoo
03-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Fact Check: Trump's children will not be affected by his birthright citizenship executive order
Claim: U.S. President Donald Trump's proposal to end birthright citizenship for children born to immigrants in the country illegally and people on temporary status would have resulted in four of his five children being deported, as they were born to immigrant mothers. Rating: What's True: Four of Trump's five children were born to immigrant mothers. Trump has proposed a plan ending birthright citizenship specifically for children of immigrants in the country illegally and for people with temporary visa status residing in the U.S. What's False: However, Trump's children were not born to mothers with questionable immigration statuses, and their father is an American citizen. Thus, they are not affected by the proposal. In late June 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled to restrict the power of federal courts to limit President Donald Trump's executive orders, a decision centered around the his order on birthright citizenship. This was seen as a victory for the Trump administration in its attempts to implement such a policy. Trump has long said he wants to end birthright citizenship and in January 2025 he issued an executive order to that effect — which faced immediate legal challenges. As we have reported previously, birthright citizenship stipulates that all people born within the boundaries of the United States are considered U.S. citizens from birth, regardless of the nationality or immigration status of their parents. After the Supreme Court ruling, many people online pointed out the irony of Trump limiting birthright citizenship, given that four of his five children were born to immigrant mothers. Trump's first and third wives — Ivana Trump and Melania Trump — were not citizens at the time they gave birth to Trump's children Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, Ivanka Trump and Barron Trump. (Reddit user u/QuaziBonzai) While it is true that the mothers of four of Trump's children were not citizens at the time of those children's births, Trump himself was an American citizen. This alone is enough to ensure that his children have American citizenship. Ivana Trump had a strong legal standing to obtain permanent residency, and Melania Trump — by her own account — already had a green card. As such, we rate this claim as mostly false. However, as we noted before, determining the legal status of an immigrant prior to achieving naturalization or permanent residency is a complex issue, as is determining the legal status of Trump's wives at the time they gave birth. At the beginning of those marriages, Trump was a real estate developer and not as entrenched in politics, so his wives' immigration statuses did not attract attention. Trump's January 2025 executive order specifically calls for ending birthright citizenship in two cases, for mothers who are in the country illegally or have temporary status in the country. It states birthright citizenship does not apply: (1) when that person's mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person's birth, or (2) when that person's mother's presence in the United States at the time of said person's birth was lawful but temporary (such as, but not limited to, visiting the United States under the auspices of the Visa Waiver Program or visiting on a student, work, or tourist visa) and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person's birth. Ivana Trump, a native Czechoslovakian, moved to New York around 1976 and married Donald Trump in April 1977. Their first son, Donald Trump Jr., was born in December 1977. The Trumps likely settled any lingering immigration matters during the time between their marriage his birth. However, even if Ivana Trump had not yet become a permanent resident in the U.S., her children would still be entitled to citizenship under Trump's plan because they were born in the country to an American citizen father. Similarly, Slovenia-native Melania Knauss Trump moved to New York City in 1996, although her immigration status came under scrutiny. She had a career as a model and, according to her immigration attorney, entered the country on a short-term visit visa, followed by an H-1B work visa which allowed her to work as a model. The lawyer noted that Melania "self-sponsored herself for a green card as a model of 'extraordinary ability,' and on March 19, 2001, she was admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident." She married Trump in January 2005. Their son, Barron Trump, was born in March 2006, more than a year after the wedding and within the U.S. to an American citizen father. Per our previous coverage, Trump's proposition was widely criticized as incongruent with the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment granting birthright citizenship to all people born inside the U.S. While it's true that the executive order could be considered hypocritical given that Trump's children were born to immigrant mothers, because Trump was married to those mothers at the time of the births, his wives had stronger legal status. One already had a green card by her own account and the other could have obtained a green card through her spouse. We have noted before that both women were already of above-average means and married to a business mogul, likely aiding their ability to gain legal status. The executive order also states the policy would "apply only to persons who are born within the United States after 30 days from the date of this order." Trump's children were all born decades before the order was issued. Even if the mothers' immigration statuses were called into question and even if Trump was not married to them at the time of the children's births, all of Trump's children have an American father. Thus, Trump's executive order against birthright citizenship would not affect the statuses of his own children. Snopes' archives contributed to this report. Garcia, Arturo. "FACT CHECK: Did Melania Trump's Parents Arrive in the U.S. Through 'Chain Migration'?" Snopes, 8 Feb. 2018, Accessed 2 July 2025. LaCapria, Kim. "Would Donald Trump Deport His Children?" Snopes, 20 Aug. 2015, Accessed 2 July 2025. Neuman, Scott. "What Is a Universal Injunction and How Did the Supreme Court Limit Its Use?" NPR, 27 Jun. 2025. NPR, Accessed 2 July 2025. "Protecting The Meaning And Value Of American Citizenship." The White House, 21 Jan. 2025, Accessed 2 July 2025. "What's next for Birthright Citizenship after the Supreme Court's Ruling." AP News, 27 Jun. 2025, Accessed 2 July 2025.
News.com.au
01-07-2025
- Health
- News.com.au
‘Almost certainly points to human intervention': Migrant mothers giving birth to more boys than girls
Immigrant mothers from China and India are giving birth to more sons than daughters, new research has found, sparking concern among experts about sex-selective abortion in Australia. The study, conducted by Edith Cowan University researchers and published in the Global Public Health journal, 'almost certainly points to' women from countries where higher value is placed upon having a boy, terminating a girl after discovering the gender through blood tests in early pregnancy. 'Indian and Chinese mothers had much higher induced abortion rates in early pregnancy than their Australian counterparts, which coincided with the introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing,' the researchers wrote of their findings. 'This study provides the most compelling observational evidence to date of male-biased sex ratio at birth among overseas-born mothers, which appears to be attributed to prenatal sex determination followed by selective abortion of females.' The research was based on an analysis of 2.1 million births in NSW and Western Australia between 1994 and 2015. It found Australian-born mothers had children within the expected natural range of 105 boys for every 100 girls. For Chinese-born mothers, however, 133 boys were born for every 100 girls, and to Indian-born mothers, 132 boys for every 100 girls. There were 115 boys for every 100 girls born to British-born mothers. Chinese-born mothers were also nine per cent more likely than those from other migrant communities to stop having children once they'd had a son. 'It is crucial to examine how these practices may influence SRB (sex ratio at birth) trends, particularly in multicultural settings like Australia, where immigrants from countries with historically skewed SRB may maintain son preference and practice prenatal sex selection in their new countries of settlement,' the researchers said. 'Australia is a multicultural country with a sizeable immigrant population from Asia and other regions with a strong culture of son preference. It is plausible that such cultural preference combined with accessibility to NIPT (non-invasive prenatal testing) services may explain the unbalanced SRB.' Sex selection using IVF – apart from exemptions to avoid gender-specific diseases – is banned in Australia. As a result, the researchers said it was most likely migrant women who were aborting girls. Perinatal epidemiologist and lead researcher Amanuel Gebremedhin said that the 'markedly skewed sex ratio at birth among certain migrant communities almost certainly points to human intervention'. 'Oftentimes, parents are able to determine the gender of the baby as early as 10 weeks of gestation,' Dr Gebremedhin told The Australian. 'Given that abortion on request in many Australian jurisdictions is generally available up to 22-24 weeks of gestation, it allows parents time to consider whether they would maintain the pregnancy.' The Edith Cowan study is the latest to indicate an increase in male-biased SRB among Asian migrants in high-income Western countries like the US, Canada, the UK and Australia. In 2015, the SBS commissioned data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) that showed an average of 108.2 boys were born for every 100 girls to Indian-born parents, and 109.5 boys were born for every 100 girls to China-born parents. Demographer Dr Christophe Guilmoto – who co-authored a 2012 United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) report on sex selection in Asia – said the figures suggested that the practice was occurring here. 'I think there is no other explanation,' Dr Guilmoto told the SBS at the time. 'Once we have run statistical test on this data and they should that the gap between the sex ratio at birth among these two communities and the rest of the population is not random, then we know there is something. 'There are very few ways to influence the sex of your child so the most common is to resort to sex-selective abortion.' Dr Gebremedhin said the findings demonstrate a need for a discussion about the 'consequences of male-based sex-selective practices', noting it could reinforce gender inequality and put pressure on women only to have sons. Studies by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and United Nations (UN) has similarly found that in parts of the world where male-biased sex-selection is a problem, the drivers are deeply entrenched social, economic, cultural and political factors that see women discriminated against in all facets of their lives. 'While maintaining rights of bodily autonomy, sex-selective abortion should be discouraged, as it undermines broader commitments to gender equality and non-discrimination,' Dr Gebremedhin said. The WHO and UN previously warned against imposing restrictions on access to abortion for sex-selective reasons because it was more likely to have harmful impacts on women and 'may put their health and lives in jeopardy'. Despite any skewing of the sex of babies born to Chinese or Indian migrants, The Demographics Group co-founder and director Simon Kuestenmacher said Australia's genders would likely stay in balance. 'This will not lead to an overly male Australia because 70 per cent of population growth comes from direct migration, and we still take in more women than men through skilled immigration, international students and backpackers,' Mr Kuestenmacher said.
