Border Patrol chief Michael Banks is stepping down

(WASHINGTON) — For more than a century, an American birth certificate has been a key to unlocking the benefits of American citizenship.

Most parents of newborns on U.S. soil have simply needed proof of birth from a hospital to apply for social security numbers, passports and early life benefits for their children. Into adulthood, the birth certificate has been universally recognized as proof of citizenship for voter registration, employment, home loans and military service.

A landmark case before the Supreme Court on Wednesday will determine whether that longstanding cultural norm and legal precedent will continue, or whether sweeping bureaucratic changes that could impact millions will soon take effect.

President Donald Trump is asking the justices to uphold his Day 1 executive order eliminating birthright citizenship under a novel interpretation of the 14th Amendment and requiring parents to prove their own legal status before citizenship is granted to their children.

All lower courts that have considered the case struck the order down.

The amendment, which was ratified in 1868, says all “persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” are citizens. Congress later codified the same language in federal citizenship law in 1940.

“Look at the dates of this long ago legislation – THE EXACT END OF THE CIVIL WAR!” Trump posted on social media Monday. “It is about the BABIES OF SLAVES!”

Trump argues children born to parents who are not American citizens or legal permanent residents were never considered “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. because they still owe political “allegiance” to a foreign nation.

Courts and the government, however, have repeatedly interpreted the 14th Amendment to unambiguously confer citizenship on all children born on U.S. soil, including to babies of unauthorized noncitizens and temporary residents, such as international students, foreign nationals who are in the U.S. on tourist visas and seasonal workers.

“The [14th] Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States,” wrote Justice Horace Gray in an 1898 Supreme Court opinion addressing the status of children born to noncitizens.

Immigrant advocates and civil liberties groups insist Trump’s order is blatantly unconstitutional — contrary to the plain text of the Constitution and history of the citizenship clause — and would unleash “chaos” nationwide.

“The impacts on this country would be catastrophic,” said ACLU attorney Cody Wofsy, who is leading the case against the order.

“Most directly, the children who would be stripped of their citizenship would be … subject to arrest, detention and deportation from the only country they’ve ever known,” Wofsy said.

An estimated 255,000 children born every year on U.S. soil to noncitizen parents could lose legal status under Trump’s order, according to the Migration Policy Institute. Some may have difficulty establishing citizenship in any country, effectively being born as “stateless.”

“Babies [born to parents] from countries like Nepal, Afghanistan, Bhutan, where there is not a clear pathway to citizenship in their home countries,” said Anisa Rahm, legal director of the South Asian American Justice Collaborative. “So therefore, where do they belong?”

While the administration insists the order will only apply to children born after it takes effect, legal scholars have warned that a ruling striking down birthright citizenship could have retroactive consequences.

“The citizenship of other Americans could be called into question,” said Winnie Kao, an attorney with the Asian Law Caucus, one of the groups that brought a class-action suit against the administration over the order.

“Vast swaths of U.S. law would need to be reexamined because they are premised on birthright citizenship,” added Kao. “It will also be a total administrative and bureaucratic nightmare for everyone — even for parents who are U.S. citizens.”

An ABC News review of Trump administration plans for implementing a new citizenship policy across federal agencies suggests a more involved and potentially complicated process for new parents than currently exists, if the executive order takes effect.

The Social Security Administration says birth certificates would no longer be sufficient documentation to obtain a new Social Security Number for a newborn.

“SSA will require evidence that such a person’s mother and/or father is a U.S. citizen or in an eligible immigration status at the time of the person’s birth,” the agency wrote in a July 2025 guidance memo.

Parents would first need to submit their own citizenship documentation by mail, phone or online, the agency said. Alternatively, parents could provide a “self-attestation” of citizenship subject to “state and federal penalties for perjury,” according to the memo.

The State Department says it would adopt similar verification measures for passport applicants.

For children born to lawful but temporary immigrants — who would no longer be eligible for citizenship — the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services says parents would need to register to obtain the same temporary legal status for their kids.

Federally funded benefits for children, like nutrition assistance and health care services, provided by the Department of Health and Human Services would also require extensive documentation by all parents to prove their children were citizens at birth, the agency said in a memo.

During oral arguments last year in a predecessor case involving Trump’s birthright citizenship order, Justice Brett Kavanaugh — often a key vote in hotly contested cases — voiced concern about whether the government would be able to carry out citizenship checks for parents of the more than 3.6 million babies born in the U.S. each year.

“Federal officials will have to figure that out essentially,” U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer told the justice under questioning.

“How?” Kavanaugh responded skeptically.

“So, you can imagine a number of ways –” Sauer began.

“Such as?” Kavanaugh quipped. “For all the newborns? Is that how it’s going to work?”

Sauer replied at the time that the administration did not have all the details worked out because courts had blocked the executive order in full.

Polls show the nation is sharply divided over the issue of American citizenship for newborn children of unauthorized immigrants. Half of adults — 50% — say they should receive U.S. citizenship; 49% say they should not, according to an April 2025 Pew Research Center survey.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — While President Donald Trump says Operation Epic Fury could last several weeks, a question some are raising is how long U.S. and allies’ missile defense stockpiles can last in an extended conflict with Iran.

Trump has insisted that the U.S. is well equipped to fight, with a “virtually unlimited supply,” and other Gulf states have pushed back on claims that they are running missiles.

How much of the U.S. interceptor stockpile is being used up to defend against Iran’s continued heavy missile and drone attacks is classified, but it’s expected to be among questions lawmakers have for top Trump administration officials this week when they brief lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

Some experts are also raising concerns about America’s cache of the expensive air defense missiles as the Iranian military continues to target U.S. assets and other allies in retaliation.

Kelly Grieco, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center think tank and former assistant professor at the Air Command and Staff College, told ABC News that the conflict is becoming a “war of attrition.”

Watch special coverage on Nightline, “War with Iran,” each night on ABC and streaming on Disney+ and Hulu.

The U.S. and Israeli militaries are now in a race to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities, including launchers and production facilities, before the U.S. and Israel’s own stockpile of air defense interceptor missiles in the region is depleted, according to Grieco.

“The question is becoming who runs out of missiles first. Does the defender run out of interceptors,” she asked, referring to the armies of the U.S., Israel and the Gulf states. “Or does Iran run out of missiles, or their ability to launch missiles?”

“If the Iranians are able to launch with the kinds of numbers they have been launching over the past 48 hours over the next four to five weeks, that does not seem sustainable from an interceptor perspective,” she added. 

“But if those numbers drop off because the U.S. and Israel destroy the launchers themselves, or their storage facilities, and the numbers drop dramatically, then we could potentially sustain this campaign,” Greico said.

Retired Lt. Gen. Dan Karbler, former commander of the U.S. Space and Missile Defense Command, told ABC News Live Tuesday that extensive drone use by the Iranian military has prompted the use of smaller short-range missiles as interceptors.

“We don’t want to shoot Patriot missiles at the drones,” he said. “So, some of our short-range air defense, more capability of that type of nature needs to flow into countries so we’re using our short-range missiles to take out these drones not our very limited patriot missiles.”

President Trump attempted to assuage concerns about the stockpile Tuesday — but also acknowledged the number of some of the highest-grade munitions is “not where we want it to be.”

“The United States Munitions Stockpiles have, at the medium and upper medium grade, never been higher or better — As was stated to me today, we have a virtually unlimited supply of these weapons,” Trump wrote on social media early Tuesday morning. 

And even as he says the U.S. will “easily prevail” in this war and that the U.S. is prepared for the operation to go on for “whatever it takes,” Trump wrote that “Wars can be fought “forever,” and very successfully, using just these supplies.” 

The U.S. was already concerned about its stockpile before this war as the Russian-Ukraine conflict, the Israeli-Gaza conflict and last summer’s conflict with Iran have dramatically increased demand for Patriot and THAAD missiles, according to Greico.

Terminal High Altitude Area Defense missiles that are used to defend against Iran’s most powerful ballistic missiles are in particularly short supply. Grieco estimated that if the U.S. uses its THAAD missiles at same rate as the 12-day conflict with Iran last year, it likely only has enough for about two weeks now at most.

Grieco said it will take a long time, and be costly, for the U.S. and other countries to replenish their antimissile stockpiles, which are more time consuming and expensive to produce than the Iranian weapons they defend against.

Iran has not launched missiles at the same scale so far compared to the attacks during conflict with Israel last year.

Israeli officials and independent experts said they believe that may reflect a strategy by Iran to run down air defense supplies with relatively smaller but steady attacks over a longer period.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Department of Homeland Security Inspector General is probing contracts that were handled by former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and the influence of former staffer Corey Lewandowski, according to sources.

The investigation is sprawling, according to sources, and court records indicate that at least one former Federal Emergency Management Agency official has received a notice to retain documents.

The IG’s office doesn’t confirm or deny “criminal or administrative” investigations, according to a statement from the office. The office did say it is auditing DHS grants and contracts, which it publicly posted on its website.

The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to ABC News’ request for comment.

During his confirmation hearing last month, DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin said that the department will cooperate with any such investigations.

The IG will be “doing the investigation,” Mullin said. “I will do everything required to me by law. And in the policies that you guys give me, there won’t be any gray area with me. We want to have a good relationship with, with the IG. He’s got a job to do.”

The FEMA official in question, Kara Voorhies, was installed by Noem to work at the department on a contract basis, according to sources.

The IG is probing her involvement in FEMA contracting processes. The cost of her contract also is under scrutiny by the IG, according to a source.

Sources have told ABC News that during the Texas floods over the July 4 holiday last year, Voorhies was unreachable during the early part of the floods and senior leadership ended up acting without getting her approval, due to the life and death nature of the floods.

A court filing said last week she is no longer a contractor or employee of FEMA, and acknowledged that her devices were with the OIG as part of the investigation. The lawsuit relates to the FEMA contracting process.

Contact information wasn’t immediately available for Voorhies.

Before President Donald Trump fired Noem as DHS secretary, the DHS IG, Joseph Cuffari, had repeatedly warned Congress that the former secretary was blocking his investigations into various matters and stalling reports from being implemented.

Lewandowski was known around the department as “the chief” according to sources, and had heavy influence in decision making at the Department. He is no longer an employee at DHS, according to a department spokesperson. 

The inspector general, according to sources, is scrutinizing how he — along with Noem — handled and awarded the contracts at DHS.

Through a spokesperson to other outlets, he has denied any wrongdoing. ABC News has reached out to Lewandowski’s attorney for comment.

Cuffari warned that the policy change last July eliminating the need for airline passengers to remove their shoes as part of Transportation Security Administration screening procedures created a “significant” security risk, and the recommendations to that report have not yet been implemented despite the secretary’s assertions to Congress that they have.

“I am writing to inform you that OIG has not received such information — written or oral — from DHS or TSA, despite our requests to the Secretary and you for that information,” Cuffari wrote to Ha Nguyen McNeil, the acting TSA administrator, in a March 4 letter. “After receiving this information, OIG will assess whether TSA’s actions adequately address the findings and recommendations and we will evaluate any evidence provided to determine whether the status of each recommendation should be ‘open and unresolved,’ ‘open and resolved,’ or ‘closed.'”

John Sandweg, the former acting general counsel at DHS, said the IG investigation appears to be wide-ranging.

“The scope of the IG review will be sweeping, looking for any improprieties in how contracts were awarded, to include whether any crimes were committed,” he told ABC News. “At the conclusion of the review, the IG would normally document their findings in a public report, describing any violations of regulation or policy or summarizing the ways in which the contract approval process hindered DHS operations.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.