New Executive Order on Birthright Citizenship Sparks Controversy
President Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship forbids issuing citizenship documents for U.S.-born children of non-citizen parents, sparking debate on its constitutionality.
President Donald Trump's recent executive order on birthright citizenship has sparked significant concern. The order prohibits federal agencies from issuing or accepting citizenship documents for children born in the U.S. if neither parent is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of the child's birth.
Critics, including a federal judge in Seattle who issued a temporary injunction, label it as unconstitutional. However, supporters argue that the policy aligns with the Fourteenth Amendment's original intent.
Legal scholars noted that prior to the Fourteenth Amendment's ratification, it was not uncommon for directives like Trump's to be accepted without controversy. They argue that the Fourteenth Amendment does not guarantee citizenship to all who are born in the U.S., rather it specifies that citizenship applies to those "subject to the jurisdiction" of the U.S.
The language of the Fourteenth Amendment was designed to ensure that protections in citizenship were exclusive to those not subject to foreign powers. For over seventy years after the Civil Rights Act, the same legal understanding persisted.
It is highlighted that Congress intended the Fourteenth Amendment to dismantle racial barriers instead of providing universal citizenship to everyone born on U.S. soil. For instance, children born to diplomats or Native Americans were not considered citizens under birthright principles.
In historic cases like the Slaughter-House cases and Elk v. Wilkins, the Supreme Court reinforced this understanding, intensifying the argument for limited birthright citizenship.
Proponents of universal birthright citizenship, claiming it is a settled doctrine, overlook these landmark cases. The decision in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark specifically established citizenship for children of lawful permanent residents, reaffirming the existing boundaries of citizenship.
As current immigration laws align with the original language of the Fourteenth Amendment, Trump's order is seen by supporters as a necessary adjustment to properly reflect the Constitution's intent, rather than an attempt to overturn existing rights.
This executive order by President Trump is viewed as a significant recalibration of federal policy regarding citizenship that is rooted in constitutional understanding. Legal experts from The Heritage Foundation reinforce that this direction is necessary and long overdue.
