The map that shows which countries grant citizens by birth that Trump wants to eliminate in the US (and which are in Latin America)

But how does this compare with citizenship laws around the world?

Citizenship by birth right, or Jus Soli (Soil law), it is not the norm worldwide.

The United States is one of the approximately 30 countries, mainly in America, which grant automatic citizenship to any person born within its borders.

On the other hand, many countries in Asia, Europe and Africa parts adhere to the beginning of the Jus Sanguinis (Blood law), according to which children inherit the nationality of their parents, regardless of their birthplace.

Other countries have a combination of both principles and also grant citizens to the children of permanent residents.

John Skrentny, a professor of sociology at the University of California in San Diego, believes that although citizens by birth right or Jus Soli is common throughout the American continent, “each state-nation reached it in its own way.”

“For example, some involved slaves and former slaves, others no. History is complicated,” he says. In the US, the 14th amendment was adopted to address the legal status of released slaves.

However, Skrentny argues that what almost everyone had in common was “building a nation-state from a former colony.”

“They had to be strategic about whom to include who exclude, and how to make the state-nation be governable,” he explains.

“For many, citizenship by birth right, based on having been born in the territory, contributed to its state construction objectives.”

“For some, he encouraged immigration from Europe; for others, he said that indigenous populations and former slaves, and their children were included as full members, and they would not be stateless. It was a particular strategy for a particular moment, and That moment may have already happened. “

In recent years, several countries have reviewed their citizenship laws, hardening or revoking citizenship by birth right due to concerns about immigration, national identity and the so -called “birth tourism”, in which people visit a country To give birth.

India, for example, once granted automatic citizenship to any person born in their territory.

But over time, concerns about illegal immigration, particularly from Bangladesh, led to restrictions.

Since December 2004, a child born in India is only a citizen if both parents are Indians, or if one of the parents is a citizen and the other is not considered an illegal immigrant.

Many African nations, which historically followed Jus Soli under the legal systems of the colonial era, abandoned it after obtaining independence. Today, most require that at least one of the parents be a citizen or permanent resident.

Citizenship is even more restrictive in most Asian countries, where it is mainly determined by offspring, as seen in nations such as China, Malaysia and Singapore.

Europe has also experienced significant changes. Ireland was the last country in the region that allowed the ius soli without restrictions.

He abolished politics after an election in June 2004, when 79% of voters approved a constitutional amendment that demanded that at least one of the parents be a citizen, permanent resident or legal temporary resident.

The Government said a change was necessary because foreign women were traveling to Ireland to give birth in order to obtain a passport of the European Union for their babies.

One of the most severe changes occurred in the Dominican Republic, where, in 2010, a constitutional amendment redefined citizens to exclude the children of undocumented immigrants.

A ruling from the 2013 Supreme Court caused this to be retroactive to 1929, stripping tens of thousands of people, mostly of Haitian ancestry, of their Dominican nationality.

Human rights groups warned that this could leave many stateless ones, since they also had no Haitian roles.

The measure was widely condemned by international humanitarian organizations and the Inter -American Court of Human Rights.

As a result of the public protest, the Dominican Republic approved a law in 2014 that established a system to grant citizens to the children of immigrants born in the Dominican Republic, particularly favoring those of Haitian ancestry.

Skrentny sees changes as part of a broader global trend.

“We are in an era of massive and easy transport migration, even through oceans. Now people can also be strategic about citizenship. That is why we are seeing this debate in the US at this time.”

A few hours after the order of President Trump, several states and cities governed by Democrats, civil rights groups and individuals filed demands.

Two federal judges supported the plaintiffs.

On Wednesday the Judge of District Deborah Boardman in Maryland agreed with the argument of five pregnant women who declared that denying citizens their children violated the constitution of the United States.

The majority of legal experts agree that President Trump cannot end citizens by birth right with an executive order.

Ultimately, this will be decided by the courts, said Saikrishna Prakash, constitutional expert and professor of the Faculty of Law of the University of Virginia. “This is not something that can decide on its own.”

The order is now suspended while the case passes through the courts.

It is not clear how the Supreme Court, where conservative judges form a supermayer, could interpret the 14th amendment if it got there.

The Trump Department of Justice has argued that it only applies to permanent residents. Diplomats, for example, are exempt.

But others contract that other US laws apply to undocumented immigrants, so the 14th amendment should also shelter them.

Subscribe here To our new newsletter to receive every Friday a selection of our best content of the week.

And remember that you can receive notifications in our app. Download the latest version and act.