President-elect Donald Trump’s administration is evaluating methods to eliminate birthright citizenship, anticipating a legal conflict likely leading to the Supreme Court, as revealed by insiders.
The Trump administration is actively exploring avenues to fulfill Trump’s commitment to abolish birthright citizenship, despite the 14th Amendment’s protection of this right. Trump has repeatedly criticized birthright citizenship, erroneously stating that the United States is the only nation offering it. He has suggested using executive orders to enact the change, initially postponing due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Strategies under consideration include instructing the State Department to deny passports to children of undocumented parents and imposing stricter visa requirements to curb ‘birth tourism,’ as per sources involved in the planning. Trump’s allies are aware that any policy shift is likely to face legal challenges, eventually requiring a decision from the Supreme Court. ‘Something has to kick off the legal battle,’ a source commented.
The 14th Amendment has been interpreted to guarantee citizenship to those born in the U.S., regardless of parental status. However, some argue that this interpretation is incorrect, asserting that the amendment should not apply to children of undocumented immigrants. Currently, approximately 4.4 million U.S.-born minors reside with undocumented parents, according to the Pew Research Center.
Legal experts anticipate that Trump’s approach will spark litigation, although persuading the Supreme Court to hear the case is uncertain unless circuit courts disagree on birthright citizenship’s meaning. If challenged in the Supreme Court’s emergency docket, the court would need to respond. Yet, it might circumvent key constitutional issues by referencing statutory laws protecting birthright citizenship instead.
Steve Vladeck, a legal analyst, suggests that while the Supreme Court has opportunities to deflect from constitutional debates, the historical legal precedent strongly supports maintaining birthright citizenship. Various groups, including the ACLU, plan to contest the initiative in court. ‘We expect to sue,’ stated Cody Wofsy of the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project, emphasizing their confidence in the constitutional protections for those born in the U.S.
Historically, Supreme Court rulings, such as those from 1898 and 1982, have upheld the 14th Amendment’s intent to include children born to noncitizens and undocumented residents as citizens. Legal professionals believe this well-established precedent will prevail, even with a conservative-leaning Supreme Court. The birthright citizenship debate fundamentally concerns national identity and democratic principles, as noted by Hiroshi Motomura of the UCLA School of Law.
Democratic attorneys general are preparing to oppose Trump’s proposals. Rob Bonta of California labeled the arguments for ending birthright citizenship as extreme and legally unfounded, while New Jersey’s Matthew Platkin shared personal stakes in the matter, highlighting its broader social impacts.
Ultimately, efforts to terminate birthright citizenship confront substantial legal barriers grounded in longstanding constitutional interpretations. The anticipated legal battles will test the resilience of these protections but are unlikely to effect immediate change.
Source: CNN
