Continuing to Protect the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship

This text is a fictional, speculative document written in the style of a formal United States Executive Order.As with the previous text you provided, it is important to clarify that this document does not describe real events or current U.S. law. It is dated in the future (August 2026) and relies on a fictional Supreme Court case (Trump v. Barbara).Here is a breakdown of the legal concepts used in this fictional order and how they compare to actual U.S. law as of 2024:The document claims that on June 30, 2026, the Supreme Court limited birthright citizenship to those "for whom no extraterritorial fiction applies."Reality: There is no such case. Under the current interpretation of the 14th Amendment established in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), almost everyone born on U.S. soil is a citizen, regardless of their parents' immigration status, provided the parents are not foreign diplomats or an invading enemy force.The fictional order attempts to codify "historical exceptions" to birthright citizenship. Here is how they relate to real law:2(a) Alien Enemies/Terrorists: Under existing legal theory (referenced in Wong Kim Ark), children born to "alien enemies" during a hostile occupation of U.S. territory are not granted citizenship. However, extending this to members of "Foreign Terrorist Organizations" or "Specially Designated Global Terrorists" would be a significant and currently untested expansion of that doctrine.2(b) Foreign Government Employees: This section actually reflects current U.S. law. Children born in the U.S. to accredited foreign diplomats (who have sovereign immunity) do not receive birthright citizenship because they are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States.2(c) Birth Tourism and Surrogacy: This is the most legally transformative part of the fictional order. Under current law, the motivation for being in the U.S. (e.g., birth tourism) does not affect the child's citizenship. This section would effectively end birthright citizenship for children of tourists or those using U.S.-based surrogates, which would likely require a Constitutional change or a total reversal of Supreme Court precedent.2(d) Territories: Currently, people born in Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands are U.S. citizens by statute (laws passed by Congress). People born in American Samoa are U.S. "nationals" but not citizens. This section of the order would suggest a move to limit citizenship in areas where it is not constitutionally guaranteed.Sections 3, 4, and 5 use standard "boilerplate" language found in real Executive Orders.Severability: A standard clause stating that if one part of the order is found illegal, the rest stays in effect.Enforcement: Directs the DOJ, DHS, and SSA to update their rules. This would mean the Social Security Administration would stop issuing SSNs to children born in the U.S. under the conditions described in Section 2.This document is an example of "legal fiction" or speculative policy writing. It imagines a scenario where a future Supreme Court overturns 125+ years of legal precedent regarding the 14th Amendment, allowing a President to narrow the definition of who is "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States.Currently, the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to all children born on U.S. soil (with the exception of children of foreign diplomats), regardless of their parents' legal status.1. The Fictional "Trump v. Barbara" Decision2. Section 2 Analysis: The Targeted Categories3. Procedural Elements (Sections 3–5)Summary