Sauer cites 'striking' figures on secretive birth tourism in high-stakes SCOTUS case

"Here's a fact about it that I think is striking," Sauer said. "Media reported as early as 2015 that, based on Chinese media reports, there are 500 - 500 - birth tourism companies in the People's Republic of China whose business is to bring people here to give birth and return to that nation."

Sauer's response came after Chief Justice John Roberts asked him about the prevalence of birth tourism, which is the practice of traveling to the United States for the purpose of giving birth, so the child can automatically receive U.S. citizenship. 

Wednesday's oral arguments centered on Trump's 2025 executive order advancing a narrower interpretation of the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause so that children born in the United States to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily would not automatically receive U.S. citizenship. 

The administration has argued the amendment's birthright citizenship provision incentivizes and rewards illegal immigration.

The GOP senators noted in the report that they could not calculate birth tourism numbers because the U.S. government does not have a way to track them. Existing visa data cannot distinguish between birth tourism and other categories of traveling to the United States, such as medical travel, they said.

Sauer, however, rattled off a string of statistics in an attempt to illustrate the magnitude of the issue.

"There's a March 9 letter from a number of members of Congress to [the Department of Homeland Security] saying, 'Do we have any information about this?' The media reports indicate estimates could be over a million, or 1.5 million, from the People's Republic of China alone," Sauer said. 

"The congressional report that we cite in our brief talks about certain hot spots, like Russian elites coming to Miami through these birth tourism companies."

Sauer noted in his opening remarks to the Supreme Court that the United States' nearly unconditional birthright citizenship policy has "spawned a sprawling industry of birth tourism, as uncounted thousands of foreigners from potentially hostile nations have flocked to give birth in the United States in recent decades, creating a whole generation of American citizens abroad with no meaningful ties to the United States."

At issue in the case before the Supreme Court is the language in the amendment that says anyone born in the United States and "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is automatically a citizen. Trump said the provision was a relic of the Civil War. 

Sauer argued that illegal immigrants and temporary visitors lacked the ability to establish a "domicile" in the United States, meaning they were subject to the jurisdiction of another country.

Roberts questioned the relevance of Sauer's birth tourism claims, asking him to confirm that it had "no impact on the legal analysis before us."

Modern-day implications of the amendment, including birth tourism, "could not possibly have been approved by the 19th century framers," Sauer replied.

"We're in a new world now, as Justice Alito pointed out, where 8 billion people are one plane ride away from having a child who's a U.S. citizen," Sauer added.

Roberts made his skepticism of Sauer's argument apparent.

"Well, it's a new world. It's the same Constitution," Roberts said.