Red, White, and Due: Desi doc under lens for birthright babies

The TOI correspondent from Washington: A California-based obstetrician of Indian origin who graduated from Secunderabad’s Gandhi Medical College has found herself swept into America’s increasingly heated battle over immigration, birthright citizenship, and what MAGA nationalists call the “birth tourism industry.”


Dr. Athiya Javid, who runs an OB-GYN practice in San Jose, is among four maternity-related businesses that received probe letters this week from the powerful House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform led by Republican chairman James Comer and Texas Congressman Brandon Gill, who heads the panel’s Task Force on Defending Constitutional Rights and Exposing Institutional Abuses.


The congressional inquiry targets what lawmakers describe as businesses “engaged in and profit from birth tourism” — the practice of foreign nationals traveling to the U.S on temporary visas specifically to give birth so their children automatically receive American citizenship under the 14th Amendment.

“Birth tourism should never be big business in the United States,” Comer and Gill wrote in a statement accompanying the probe, adding, “This tactic exploits U.S. immigration law, and those who willfully misrepresent their intentions to temporarily come to the U.S. are breaking the law.” Besides Dr. Javid’s clinic, the letters were sent to Doctores Para Ti, Have My Baby in Miami and International Maternity Services.


The lawmakers claimed most foreign nationals using such services are from China and Russia, raising what they called “national security concerns.” Gill struck an even sharper tone, saying it should “appall every American” that a “thriving birth tourism economy” exists in the country.


The letter to Dr. Javid accuses her practice of explicitly marketing services to “international patients seeking maternity care” and offering assistance that allegedly goes beyond medical treatment, including “logistics support, temporary housing assistance, and legal consultations.”


Congressional investigators demanded records dating back to January 2020, including advertising materials, contracts, visa-related coaching documents, referral agreements, and aggregate figures on clients and revenues generated from maternity packages tailored for foreign expectant mothers.


The panel specifically asked for “all documents and communications regarding coaching materials or ‘how to’ guides for obtaining a temporary visitor visa” and for navigating U.S. Customs and Border Protection screening. As of Friday morning, Dr. Javid had not publicly responded to the allegations. Other companies contacted by Congress had either declined comment or not responded.


Birth tourism occupies a legally murky space in the U.S. While it is not illegal for a foreign visitor to give birth while in America, legal issues arise when authorities believe an applicant concealed the true purpose of travel while obtaining a tourist visa, potentially amounting to visa fraud. In 2020, the U.S. State Department tightened visa rules to deny tourist visas when officials believe the primary purpose of travel is childbirth for citizenship.


Birth tourism has periodically surfaced in U.S. law enforcement crackdowns over the past decade, particularly involving Chinese-operated maternity houses in California. In one high-profile case, federal prosecutors secured convictions against operators of a Southern California network accused of coaching Chinese clients on how to deceive immigration officers. Another case involved a Turkish national sentenced to prison in New York for orchestrating a healthcare fraud-linked birth tourism scheme.


Congressional Republicans and conservative immigration groups argue the industry has grown substantially. The Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies estimated in 2020 that roughly 26,000 babies were born annually to women on tourist visas. A later estimate placed the figure at around 70,000 births in 2023 involving temporary visitors.


Historically, Chinese nationals have dominated the birth tourism industry, particularly wealthy families seeking educational and mobility advantages for their children. Russian clients also became prominent during the past decade, especially in Florida and Southern California, with agencies openly advertising “American baby” packages. Women from Nigeria, Turkey, Brazil, South Korea and parts of the Middle East are also said to have also participated in the practice. Indian involvement appears comparatively modest, though Indian-origin doctors, consultants and travel facilitators occasionally operate in the broader medical tourism ecosystem. Unlike Chinese birth tourism networks, which often involved large maternity hostels and organised visa coaching, there is little evidence of extensive India-based operations targeting U.S. citizenship births at scale.


Still, the issue resonates politically because India is deeply entwined with America’s immigration system through the H-1B and family visa pipelines. Indian nationals already account for some of the largest backlogs for employment-based green cards, meaning many Indian families legally resident in the U.S. spend years in temporary visa status while their U.S.-born children automatically become citizens. That contradiction has made Indians unusually sensitive participants in the birthright citizenship debate. Critics of Trump’s proposed restrictions argue that curbing citizenship for children of temporary visa holders could ensnare thousands of law-abiding Indian professionals working in Silicon Valley, medicine and academia.


The inquiry nevertheless signals that birth tourism, once viewed as a niche immigration loophole, is becoming a front-line issue in America’s broader culture war over citizenship, immigration and national identity -- with foreign/Indian doctors, maternity businesses and even U.S.-born desi infants increasingly drawn into the political crossfire.