For people born in the United States or naturalized honestly, the short answer is: not against their will. Citizenship can be given up, and naturalization obtained by fraud can be undone, but the Supreme Court has held that Congress cannot simply strip it as a punishment.
The constitutional starting point
The Fourteenth Amendment says that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” In Afroyim v. Rusk (1967), the Court struck down a law that took away the citizenship of Americans who voted in a foreign election, holding that the government has no general power to take citizenship without the citizen’s assent. Vance v. Terrazas (1980) added that the government must prove the person intended to give up citizenship, not just that they did something the law lists as an expatriating act.
Giving it up: expatriation
Federal law (8 U.S.C. § 1481) lists acts that can end citizenship if done voluntarily and with the intent to relinquish it: formally renouncing before a U.S. consular officer, serving as an officer in a foreign army engaged in hostilities against the United States, or being convicted of treason, among others. Intent is the key element in every case.
Undoing a naturalization: denaturalization
Naturalized citizens face one additional route. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1451, the government can go to federal court to revoke naturalization that was “illegally procured” or obtained by concealing or misrepresenting a material fact. In Maslenjak v. United States (2017), the Court held that a false statement must have actually mattered to the grant of citizenship to support revocation. Denaturalization is a court process with a high standard of proof, not an administrative decision.
The Enemy Expatriation Act
In 2011 and 2012, bills introduced as the Enemy Expatriation Act would have added “engaging in, or purposefully and materially supporting, hostilities against the United States” to the list of expatriating acts. Critics, including this domain’s previous publisher, argued it would let the government strip citizenship without a criminal conviction. Supporters said the existing intent requirement and court review would still apply. The bills never became law.
What is birthright citizenship?
Birthright citizenship is the rule that a person born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen, whatever their parents’ nationality or immigration status. It comes from the Fourteenth Amendment’s first sentence: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” Federal law, 8 U.S.C. § 1401, says the same thing. The legal term is jus soli, “right of the soil,” in contrast to jus sanguinis, citizenship through a parent, which the U.S. also recognizes for many children born abroad to American parents.
The words “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” carve out a few narrow exceptions: children of foreign diplomats, and historically children of enemy forces occupying U.S. territory. United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) held that a man born in San Francisco to Chinese parents, who themselves were barred from naturalizing, was a citizen at birth.
A 2025 executive order, Executive Order 14160, tried to stop recognizing the citizenship of children born to mothers in the country unlawfully or on temporary visas when the father was not a citizen or permanent resident. On June 30, 2026, in Trump v. Barbara, the Supreme Court struck it down. The majority held that those children are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and are citizens at birth, reaffirming Wong Kim Ark. Justice Kavanaugh agreed on the narrower ground that the order conflicts with the citizenship statute, and three justices dissented. Changing the rule now would take a constitutional amendment or a different Supreme Court ruling. For the full background, see what is the 14th Amendment.
Birthright citizens are in the same position as anyone else born a citizen: under Afroyim, the government cannot take their citizenship away against their will.