Tennessee’s Attorney General, Jonathan Skrmetti, has joined forces with Iowa and 23 other states to submit a brief to the United States Supreme Court. This coalition is pushing for a reevaluation of the constitutional definition of birthright citizenship.

The 30-page amicus brief claims that the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment—which guarantees citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States”—has been interpreted in an overly expansive manner.

The coalition of states argues that automatic citizenship should be limited to children whose parents are legally present in the United States and have a formal allegiance to the country.

“The notion that everyone born in the U.S. is automatically granted citizenship doesn’t align with the original language of the Fourteenth Amendment or its historical understanding when it was enacted post-Civil War,” Skrmetti commented in a public statement.

The brief references historical records from the Reconstruction era up to the early 20th century, proposing that the original lawmakers linked citizenship to the legal domicile and status of one’s parents. It also questions the interpretation of the landmark 1898 Supreme Court decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which involved a man born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrants. This case has long been the cornerstone of the modern interpretation of birthright citizenship.

“Before Wong Kim Ark and in its aftermath, I haven’t encountered any cases where citizenship was denied based on parental legal presence,” said Jim Holton, a lecturer at Middle Tennessee State University. “The arguments made by Skrmetti and others about parental intent for permanent residence and allegiance to the U.S. are unprecedented.”

Tennessee is joined by states including Florida, Georgia, Texas and Missouri, to name some. They argue the Supreme Court should clarify who qualifies for automatic citizenship under the Constitution.

“The Supreme Court in deciding that case very firmly stated that his own parentage did not matter that all that mattered was that Wong Kim Ark was born in the United States, and he owed his allegiance to the United States from the very beginning,” Holton said. “I think it’s very remarkable because at that point, Chinese immigrants were not allowed to become citizens, all Asian immigrants were not allowed to become citizens.”

It’s unclear how this would play out if overturned. Some questions have arisen about whether the government would have to verify parental status for every birth or potentially create a class of people born in the U.S. without any citizenship anywhere.

“That is a fear that somebody could be stateless or a second-class citizen, which this country has traditionally, something which this country never had to encounter,” said Bill Gerstein, an immigration attorney at Gerstein & Gerstein.

Skrmetti is expected to discuss Tennessee’s role in the filing in the coming days.