“We’re the only country in the world where a person comes in and has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United States for 85 years with all of those benefits,” Trump told Axios in an interview taped on Monday. “It’s ridiculous. It’s ridiculous. And it has to end.”
While Trump was ambiguous on the subject, it is likely that the children of legal immigrants who have attained US citizenship will be unaffected by the planned policy order.
In the US, birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which reads: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” While originally drafted in 1868 to establish civil rights for freed slaves and their descendents, the amendment has been widely interpreted to grant full citizenship rights to anyone born within the US.
“It was always told to me that you needed a constitutional amendment,” Trump told Axios. “Guess what? You don’t.”
“It’s in the process. It’ll happen . . . with an executive order,” he said.
If Trump intended to press ahead with the executive order, the president would likely face a complete and total backlash.Trump’s critics immediately sounded the alarm on Twitter
While Trump can issue an executive order on birthright citizenship, that order can then be challenged in court, and overturned if it is found unconstitutional. This was the case earlier this year and last year when the first iterations of the president’s controversial travel ban were declared unconstitutional by federal courts.
Any executive order issued by Trump would therefore have to fall within the boundaries set by the Constitution, and the Supreme Court would have to determine whether the text of the 14th Amendment actually guarantees birthright citizenship, a matter of intense debate among legal scholars.
“A proper originalist interpretation of the US Constitution, as presently written, guarantees American citizenship to those born within our borders, with only a few limited exceptions,” lawyer Dan McLaughlin wrote in a National Review column last month.
However, McLaughlin noted that one line in the Amendment – “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” – could cause some ambiguity. If Congress were to decide that illegal immigrants are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, then the case could be made that the protections of the 14th Amendment do not apply to them. Indeed, at the time of the Amendment’s writing, Senator. Lyman Trumbull argued that “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” meant “not owing allegiance to anybody else,” for example, a foreign country.
Trumbull’s interpretation has been used by opponents of birthright citizenship, like legal scholar Edward J. Erler, to argue against automatic citizenship, but the text of the Constitution can be endlessly dissected and analyzed for different answers.
Some scholars have called for Congress to finally legislate on whether the children of noncitizens are subject to US jurisdiction or not, and end the debate for good.
In a Washington Post op-ed this July, former Trump administration national security official Michael Anton called for such legislation, and argued that “the notion that simply being born within the geographical limits of the United States automatically confers US citizenship is an absurdity — historically, constitutionally, philosophically and practically.”
With immigration a top priority for Republican voters, some saw the President’s statement as bluster, intended to fire up his base ahead of next week’s crucial midterm elections.
Trump has touted a hardline approach to immigration in recent weeks, as a thousands-strong ‘caravan’ of migrants makes its way to the US’ southern border from Central America. Trump has called the caravan an “invasion” and the Pentagon has announced plans to deploy 5,200 troops to the border, where they will bolster the existing National Guard and Customs and Border Patrol presence.
Trump has also vowed to corral the migrants into “very nice”tent cities upon arrival, where they will be held until their asylum cases can be heard.
While the president claimed the US is “the only country” that offers birthright citizenship, 33 other countries, including Canada, Brazil, Mexico and Argentina, do the same.
ATTENTION READERS
We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully InformedIn fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.
About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
How can any U.S. Citizen also be a citizen of Israel and also honestly serve, without conflicts of interest, in our Congress? This is totally outrageous and insane, yet no one is even talking about this problem except a few on this board. This is a blatant conflict of interest and must be stopped. Frankly there should be a petition right now to abolish this with a Constitutional Amendment. It should be illegal now. Israel is using this to bribe the whores in Congress to do their bidding and destroy this country. Don’t expect Israel lover Trump to sign an executive order on this basic issue. He thinks he is a little orange haired dictator of America. He also carefully hid is allegiance to Israel before the election. He is very likely a Jew or a converted Jew himself. All this information, like his tax returns, are a carefully guarded secret.
While Trump’s at it he should sign an Executive Order to not only ban dual citizenship, but to also make those who hold dual citizenship choose the country they identify with. And then give them a polygraph.
End dual citizenship immediately, if he can actually do that, it’s a major first step in the right direction.
Comments are closed.