Staff Reports
President Trump’s recent executive order regarding birthright citizenship has sparked legal debates and challenges from the Left. However, it is important to approach these arguments with a critical eye. Austin Sarat, a professor, has criticized the order, calling it anti-constitutional. But it is essential to note that President Trump has followed court rulings diligently, unlike his predecessor, who often went against Supreme Court directives with policies like vaccine mandates and rent suspensions.
The core of Trump’s order is to redefine the criteria for birthright citizenship, stating that merely being born on American soil is not enough to claim citizenship. This notion aligns with the original intention of the 14th Amendment, which aimed to grant citizenship to freed slaves. The phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the Amendment is crucial, indicating that both being born in the U.S. and being under its complete political jurisdiction are necessary for citizenship.
COURT SAYS FORGEDDABOUDIT – in response to Trump's Executive Order contradicting the birth right to be a citizen when born here – Judge Calls Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order ‘Blatantly Unconstitutional’ pic.twitter.com/Z6zGAoEjQw
— John P. Flannery (@JonFlan) January 23, 2025
Legal history provides further context, showing that children of foreign citizens or those not completely under U.S. jurisdiction were not automatically granted citizenship. The case of Wong Kim Ark, a child of Chinese immigrants, exemplifies this, as his parents’ allegiance to China prevented him from being recognized as a citizen despite being born in the U.S.
President Trump’s order stems from declaring an “invasion emergency” at the southern border. By deeming illegal immigrants as hostile invaders, Trump challenges the notion of birthright citizenship for their children. This move highlights the president’s commitment to addressing immigration issues, a stance that aligns with his administration’s broader policies.
While the legal battle surrounding Trump’s executive order continues, it is evident that his decision is rooted in historical context and a commitment to upholding the law. The coming months will likely see further debates and challenges, but President Trump’s resolve on this issue is clear. Ultimately, this order reflects his administration’s stance on immigration and citizenship matters.
