Listen to the article
In a controversial appearance on Fox News, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi sparked outrage by claiming that American citizenship is a “privilege” rather than a constitutional right, contradicting the fundamental guarantees established in the 14th Amendment.
During a panel discussion on Friday, Bondi stated: “Being a citizen in our country is a privilege, not a right. And Donald Trump is going to have everyone in this country who deserves to be here, who is a citizen.” The statement immediately drew criticism from viewers and constitutional experts.
The 14th Amendment explicitly grants birthright citizenship to individuals born or naturalized in the United States. Section 1 of the amendment, ratified in 1868 following the Civil War, states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” This amendment has historically been interpreted to confer automatic citizenship to nearly all children born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents’ immigration status.
Social media erupted with corrections to Bondi’s statement. “It’s literally a right under the 14th Amendment,” wrote one user on X (formerly Twitter). Another pointed out the constitutional contradiction more thoroughly: “Calling citizenship a ‘privilege’ kinda/sorta/definitely ignores how the Constitution works. If you’re a citizen, that’s a protected right – full stop, not something a president gets to hand out or take away based on who they think ‘deserves’ it.”
Some commenters expressed concern about the implications of Bondi’s framing, questioning whether the Trump administration might attempt to revoke citizenship from individuals they deem undeserving. “So… are they saying they can just take the citizenship away from everyone they judge not deserving of it?” one user asked.
The controversy highlights the Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to restrict immigration and redefine citizenship parameters. Since the beginning of his second term, President Trump has focused on limiting birthright citizenship, particularly targeting children of migrants who are in the country illegally or on temporary visas.
On his first day in office, Trump signed Executive Order 14156, titled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” which aimed to end automatic citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants and those with temporary status. The order argued that the 14th Amendment “has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.'”
This interpretation represents a significant departure from decades of constitutional understanding and Supreme Court precedent. In the 1898 case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court ruled that a child born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents was a citizen by birth under the 14th Amendment.
Trump’s executive orders faced immediate legal challenges, with several federal judges blocking their implementation on constitutional grounds. However, in June 2025, the Supreme Court ruled that district courts could not authorize nationwide injunctions against the executive order, potentially opening the door for continued legal battles over the issue.
Constitutional scholars have consistently maintained that changing birthright citizenship would require a constitutional amendment, not merely an executive order or legislation. The process of amending the Constitution is intentionally difficult, requiring a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures.
As this debate continues, Bondi’s comments have added fuel to an already contentious national conversation about immigration, constitutional rights, and the limits of executive power in redefining fundamental aspects of American citizenship.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
13 Comments
Citizenship as a privilege rather than a right? That’s a concerning and incorrect stance. I hope the former AG takes the time to re-examine the 14th Amendment and issue a correction to her previous statement.
The former AG is simply wrong on this. Citizenship is an inalienable right, not a privilege that can be revoked. I hope she takes the time to properly understand the 14th Amendment and its historical significance.
Citizenship as a privilege, not a right? That’s simply not true. The 14th Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship as a fundamental right. I hope the former AG will correct the record and reaffirm this core American principle.
This is a concerning statement from the former AG. Citizenship is a fundamental right enshrined in the 14th Amendment, not a privilege. I hope she corrects the record and recognizes the constitutional guarantees of birthright citizenship.
The former AG’s statement is deeply concerning and contradicts the Constitution. Citizenship is a right, not a privilege. I hope she takes the time to fully understand the 14th Amendment and issues a correction to set the record straight.
The 14th Amendment is clear – citizenship is a right, not a privilege. Claiming otherwise undermines core American principles. I hope the public outcry leads to a retraction and correction from the former AG.
Absolutely. Spreading misinformation about citizenship rights is unacceptable, especially from a former high-ranking official. The 14th Amendment protects this fundamental right.
It’s disappointing to see a former Attorney General make such an erroneous claim about citizenship rights. The 14th Amendment is clear – citizenship is a constitutional guarantee, not a privilege. I hope this is swiftly corrected.
Citizenship is a constitutional right, not a privilege that can be taken away. I’m surprised to see a former AG make such a statement that contradicts longstanding legal precedent. Hopefully this will be swiftly corrected.
The 14th Amendment is unambiguous – citizenship is a right, not a privilege. Statements to the contrary from a former AG are deeply troubling and should be retracted. I hope the public pressure leads to a correction.
Absolutely. Fundamental rights like citizenship should not be mischaracterized, especially by former government officials. The 14th Amendment must be upheld and respected.
This is a troubling misunderstanding of the law. Citizenship is an inalienable right protected by the 14th Amendment, not a privilege that can be revoked. I hope the former AG will issue a retraction and reaffirm the importance of birthright citizenship.
This is a concerning misunderstanding of the Constitution. Citizenship is a right, not a privilege. I hope the former AG takes the time to correct her statement and acknowledge the 14th Amendment’s clear protections.