Why did Trump take on birthright citizenship?
It never made sense to me that the offspring of two foreign nationals would automatically attain U.S. citizenship only because they were born on American soil – but there was a good reason when the 14th Amendment was adopted in 1868.
The issue that motivated the enactment of the Amendment was the end of slavery – and to nullify the Supreme Court Dred Scott decision of 1857, which banned Black Africans – including Black freemen – from citizenship. Birthright citizenship was crafted to thwart efforts to deny Black citizenship by guaranteeing citizenship to newborn Blacks regardless of the previous status of the parents as citizens or not.
The problem with the Amendment is that it has outlived its purpose and utility – and has led to abuse as America shifted more and more to a nation of immigrants. It reversed the law and the logic of parents becoming citizens with underage children automatically following. Adult children would have to apply for citizenship on their own.
Birthright citizenship created a situation in which the child of immigrants (including temporary workers, foreign students, visitors and even illegal border crossers) are automatically declared to be citizens of the United States even if their parents were not.
Today, the abuse of the 14th Amendment is its most common application. It has resulted in a phenomenon known as “anchor babies.” Foreigners come to America while pregnant for the explicit purpose of birthing their children in the United States. They then use that fact of their child’s citizenship as leverage to remain in the United States and potentially seek citizenship for themselves.
The “anchor baby” issue is not limited to Mexicans and other South American migrants. Asians and Africans also use the 14th Amendment to give birth in America. I have personally seen examples of that in my dealings in China. Approximately 24 percent of all births in America are birthright citizens. That means of the approximate 4 million births each year more than 900,00 birthright citizens.
It complicates the current border crisis because it complicates the issue of deportation. In many cases, the parents are here illegally, ineligible for asylum, under deportation orders and, in some cases, convicted criminals. Applying American immigration laws – including deportation – has the potential of separating parents from their children. That has become a controversial political issue. The “anchor baby” strategy tends to work.
(It should be noted that the concern over separating children from their parents who break the law applies largely to illegal immigrants. When American parents break a law, we send them to jail. We do not excuse them from justice – the rule of law — because they have children. They get separated from their children. The responsibility for that is on them, not on those who enforce the law.)
Birthright citizenship has not only outlived its purpose, but it creates untoward and unnecessary immigration issues.
President Trump has followed up on his promise to attempt to end birthright citizenship. On his first day of his second term, he signed an Executive Order to fulfill his campaign promise. But … there is a catch. Birthright citizenship is in the Constitution.
Consequently, several federal judges have issued injunctions to block the order from being implemented pending a full court hearing. Many legal scholars – and I dare say most – believe that the Supreme Court would eventually uphold birthright citizenship based on the way the 14th Amendment is written. But as with many constitutional issues, there is interpretive wiggle room – but not a lot.
Trump critics have been quick to call the court stepping in as a setback — and even a defeat for Trump. But is it?
I have no doubt that Trump and his advisors knew the courts would block immediate implementation. I also believe that they are well aware that their chances in court of less than 50/50. So, why issue the Executive Order in the first place? I think there are several reasons – and they all accrue to Trump’s benefit.
First and foremost, he shows those who oppose birthright citizenship that he is trying – and will continue to fight. According to an Emerson University poll, 45 percent of Americans support Trump on the issue with 37 percent opposed. The polls show a rather high 19 percent with no opinion on the issue. Other polls tell a different story. The YouGov poll shows 60 percent of Americans favoring the retention of birthright citizenship.
Those numbers suggest that should Trump fail to end birthright citizenship, he may benefit both ways. He will have held his base by trying but will never be blamed for actually ending it.
By issuing the Executive Order, Trump has made birthright citizenship a front burner issue. As more folks learn about the downside of birthright citizenship, and the abuses are brought to the fore, there is opportunity for a shift in public opinion. That also serves Trump’s interests.
Trump’s action could eventually lead to an effort to amend the Constitution — which would create a national debate. That could be a game-changer. Whether birthright citizenship is ended or not, Trump may wind up the winner on the issue.
So, there ‘tis.
Larry, Clueless on this matter as usual. Issuing Executive Orders and having them blocked by the courts can never be considered a ‘win’, despite what you say. Stirring the populace up on issues, while being the Republican modus operandi, is not the way to run the country. Republicans typically use these tactics in order to gain votes, because what they really want to do doesn’t work, and is unpopular. So they get people all stirred up on social issues, be it trans people, gay marriage, or abortion, rather than addressing what they really want, which is to cut taxes, gut the government services-none of which has been successful in improving the lives of the average American Citizen in the 40+ years that we have been following this strategy. Now Trump has made this an artform, stirring his supporters with totally foolish ideas like making Canada a state, taking the Panama Canal back by force, also taking Greenland and decreeing that he will change the name of the Gulf of Mexico, but what else can we expect from an empty shell like our current President (those of us who look at matters objectively say “is he really this stupid?” The answer is a resounding yes…)? And no-there is absolutely no chance that we will amend the constitution to make Trump’s Executive Order the law-what he is doing is stirring up the opposition to him, which is not a good way for him to be a successful President (of course, he has never been ‘successful in any prior job except running his mouth….)
You can blame activist judges put in place by commiecrats
Jim, You make zero sense. Activist judges did not write the amendment to the constitution that Trump’s order is ‘s violating. Pull your head out of your ass and face the facts-this is the most corrupt administration in history (along with the worst). Ordering the prosecutors to stop pursuing Mayor Eric Adams on corruption charges? Democrats are the ones that pointed the finger at Adams (a democrat) and now Trump’s DOJ is pulling the charges against him? The activist members of the judiciary are far more common on the conservative side than the liberal….
I’m a waxin poetic on this one Larry, because “Frankly, Larlet, I don’t give a flying fuck.” And you know I am frank….Frank Danger that is, third eye…..
First off, yes, it’s outlived it’s time, correcto mundo, Larro. Further, it can be construed, though rarely proven, as a loophole. So, it needs to be gone, or gone with exceptions only through the court. And it will be weird. For example, is Barron a birthright or a natural —- better check those dates. And is it birth or conception?
Second, most important, and seriously — do it right and than means amend the amendment in the Constitution. And limit it to that, no bundling, no extensions, just end this.
But, instead, Mr. Art o’ da Deal, the ole organ grinder breaks out his tool of choice and grinds, baby grinds. He’s tossed a shiny object out there for all to see, all to wonder, all to talk about, and now we will see which monkeys in Congress get up and dance. Dance, baby, dance.
1/25 The Hill announces: “Trump’s bid to end birthright citizenship sparks GOP divisions” as the battle lines within his own party and the flying monkeys begin to dance. The House GOP puts out a bill. Eighteen states sue the Federal Government by 2/5/25 and the game is afoot!!!
Like I said: remove the loophole, do it right via Constitutional change, next shiny object please. Flood the zone.
What did SCOTUS give Trump when it gave him immunity? Immunity from what, unconstitutional EO’s, illegal firings, illegally ceasing payments Congress allocated for decades, illegally reversing environmental protection control in energy producing companies, and cutting financial support historically given to certain organizations which happen to be not loyal to Trump and his so called policies.
I don’t remember any one passing away and a public coronation making him King Donald the 1st.
Only a King can get away with the authoritarian hijinks Trump is pulling that benefit his billionaire buddy’s.
His first month in office has been a travesty and a frontal assault on America and our Constitutional Democracy.
Trump did not win with enough margin to call it mandate from the people, especially not the wholesale disassembly of the government.
What he is wanting to accomplish is like throwing out the baby with it bath water and tossing the whole family out into the winter’s cold while he is in the mood for jettisoning what he sees as disloyal to him.
Having absolute and sacred loyalty as the first priority for survival in the Trump dynasty is anti- democratic, authoritarian, and virtual enslavement.
How can you, Horist, stomach Trump’s contrarian position and still think he can be a conservative. I don’t see authoritarian in the definition for conservatism.
So, Larry, are you on board with Trump’s policy enactments to date? Do you still hold to the indefensible opinion that you dislike his pugnacious personality but you like his pugnacious policies.
Trump is attempting the establishment of a Super Executive Branch with greater powers over the other two branches in government.
I see Trump expecting his EO’s to be challenged in court and when enough of the tie up the judicial system that that mess of tangles will be a large enough distraction to shield his real intentions from general public’s view.
His foreign policies regarding Ukraine have not been made clear, other than his withholding financing already promised and saying Putin won..
Loud noises in media from a great many other areas of some national security concern are meant to cover over a multitude of his sins at home and abroad.
Trump has more insiders expecting a large return on their political loyalty investment. How long he will be able to keep this ruse alive depends on how long his people can live with the consciences while honoring Trump above honoring their nation. The are deluded if they think loyalty to Donald is equal to loyalty to America. The one is cult loyalty. The other is could be called patriotism.
Don’t get me started on my opinion on the subject of on Trump’s religious inclinations particularly his personal investment in Christianity. Is his saying he is Christian politically profitable and otherwise unimportant for his decision making . The first days in office are a tell that would prove the truth on the degree to which his decisions as President are consistent to some stated religious belief.
How far do you think he would go with the so called Christians if he did lie but truthfully admit he is an agnostic toward religious beliefs.
Given that Christian Republicans or if it’s preferred Republican Christians are in name Republicans. It’s probable that they would vote Trump. But, maybe they would not be as rabid about Trump.