(Reuters) -Republican U.S. Senator Markwayne Mullin said on Sunday he believes babies born in the United States to immigrants living in the country illegally should be deported alongside their parents if the adults are removed.

Mullin’s comments on NBC’s “Meet the Press” came in response to questions about a U.S. Supreme Court decision on Friday that paved the way for President Donald D T’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship to go into effect soon in some states.

The court’s ruling did not address the legality of D T’s order, which would upend the historic practice of granting U.S. citizenship to anyone born in the country regardless of their parents’ immigration status.

NBC’s Kristen Welker asked Mullin what should happen to babies born in the United States whose parents are deported, given that the children are U.S. citizens under current law.

“Well, they should go where their parents are,” said Mullin, of Oklahoma. “Why wouldn’t you send a child with their parents? I mean, why would you want to separate them?”

Friday’s court decision caused confusion among immigrants and advocates, who scrambled to understand the practical effects if birthright citizenship applies to babies born in some states but not in others.

Senator Markwayne Mullin Sparks Outrage: “Deport U.S.-Born Babies If Parents Are Undocumented”

(Reuters) — In a moment that sent shockwaves through immigration circles and legal communities alike, Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma declared on Sunday that babies born in the United States to undocumented immigrants should be deported along with their parents if the adults are removed from the country.

Mullin made the controversial statement during an interview on NBC’s Meet the Press, responding to questions about a U.S. Supreme Court decision on Friday that cleared the way for former President Donald D T’s executive order challenging the longstanding principle of birthright citizenship to potentially take effect in certain states.

While the high court’s decision did not explicitly rule on the legality of D T’s proposed restriction, it opened the door for a dramatic reinterpretation of the 14th Amendment—a shift that could unravel more than a century of constitutional precedent.

Pressed by NBC host Kristen Welker about the fate of U.S.-born children—currently granted automatic citizenship under the Constitution—Mullin didn’t hesitate.

“They should go where their parents are,” he said. “Why wouldn’t you send a child with their parents? I mean, why would you want to separate them?”

His comments ignited immediate backlash from immigrant rights advocates and legal scholars, who argue that forcibly removing U.S. citizens—especially infants—from their birth country would constitute a grave human rights violation and a direct assault on constitutional protections.

The Supreme Court’s ruling has already sown confusion across the nation, with immigration attorneys, civil rights groups, and families frantically trying to interpret what the future holds. Could birthright citizenship soon depend on your ZIP code? Will some states now deny newborns the rights guaranteed under federal law?

For many, Mullin’s remarks weren’t just controversial—they were a warning shot. A sign that, under a potential second D T presidency, the very definition of American citizenship could be rewritten.

And the first to be affected? Babies. Born on U.S. soil. But now caught in the crossfire of politics.