The United States Supreme Court recently struck down President Donald Trump’s executive order that sought to limit birthright citizenship for children based on their parents’ migration status.

This reflects a broader trend where policymakers target migrant women’s reproduction to justify stricter citizenship laws. Our research shows that Canada is not immune to such influences.

What can the U.S. ruling teach Canada about the importance of upholding birthright citizenship?

Birthright citizenship via what’s known as jus soli allows children born in a country to automatically acquire its citizenship at birth. Trump falsely claims that the U.S. is the only country with birthright citizenship, but 36 countries — including Canada — currently maintain unrestricted jus soli citizenship provisions.

Birthright citizenship has become a point of debate as some governments adopt more restrictive policies aimed at limiting citizenship for certain migrants. While the latest American attempt failed, successful rollbacks of birthright citizenship in other countries serve as a warning.

At the heart of these debates is reproductive racism — the systemic control or regulation of people’s pro-creative capacities based on their race. The political reasons for restricting citizenship policy are tied directly to anti-immigrant, racist and sexist sentiments that stigmatize migrant women’s reproduction.

This was at play in the 1986 Australian Citizenship Act amendment, following the Kioa v West case where Tongan parents of an Australian-born child sought to avoid deportation; the 2004 Irish citizenship referendum, which maligned African women asylum-seekers’ reproduction; New Zealand’s 2005 Citizenship Act amendment, which restricted citizenship for children born to transient migrants; and the Dominican Republic’s 2010 constitutional reform, which was rooted in anti-Haitian........

© The Conversation