End Birthright Citizenship-Trump

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by nosborne48, Dec 9, 2024.

Loading...
  1. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    I finally read the EO text. Good piece of legal draftsmanship, too.

    There is a hidden issue, though. The EO does not purport to grant or deny citizenship. It can't. The 14th amendment citizenship clause is self executing. Sooo....what is Trump doing, here? Is he extending citizenship to everyone born to two undocumented parents before the order's effective date? He has no power to do that. By requiring the government to issue documents to such people as the order says are NOT citizens under the law, he is exceeding his powers.

    Or is he just saying that his administration will not challenge the claims of such people? He CAN do that but there are potential consequences under equal protection.
     
  2. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    A footnote: arguably, the claim to citizenship by any passport holder has already been adjudicated by the State Department in the process and is "res judicata". Even if the adjudication was erroneous, the matter probably cannot be reopened.
     
  3. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Well, I think I've come around to Dr Douglas' opinion as to the viability of Trump's EO. I don't know what SCOTUS will do but I won't be surprised if they uphold it.
     
    Rich Douglas likes this.
  4. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    18 state Attorneys General have joined to sue the Trump Administration over the birthright citizenship EO. I wonder how they have standing.
     
    NotJoeBiden likes this.
  5. NotJoeBiden

    NotJoeBiden Active Member

    As well as Washington DC and San Francisco.
     
  6. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    The chaos continues, begins in earnest, expands to new heights, simmers above and below, all of the above. Welcome to the Trump administration.
     
  7. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Maybe from the states being the source of vital records? Kind of a stretch, but then in this case what isn't?
     
  8. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Version 2.0, like Windows Vista, is a downgraded upgrade.
     
  9. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Nooo. I don't THINK so...but here's a thought, anyway. State citizenship is also defined in the 14th amendment and it depends entirely upon federal citizenship. Maybe the answer is there?
     
  10. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    There is a slight of hand in the EO which I've no doubt the AGs and ACLU will exploit fully. The EO conflates the status and rights of the parents with those of the child. But the 14th amendment doesn't require that a child's PARENTS be "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". It requires that the CHILD be so subject. The result is circular. If the child is subject, the child is a citizen. If not, not.
     
  11. SnafuRacer

    SnafuRacer Active Member

    That. I think it would come to the subject of jurisdiction, except for diplomatic immunity.
    I had a Soldier when I was in S. Korea who was born in NYC, lived all his life with a US passport, US birth certificate and eventually joined the US Army and served for 3 years until then. He wanted to renew his passport at US Embassy Seoul. They found out his father was a diplomat from Niger, assigned to the UN when he was born. They automatically denied his passport application, started proceedings to revoke his citizenship and referred him to the Army to be discharged and sent back to Niger. Even the Army JAGs were taken aback and had to review the law to find out if true. They tried to prosecute him on charges of falsifying official documents but eventually relented as he was a child when he obtained his paperwork.
    So I wonder how all this would affect those who are here and born to illegal immigrants, who are subject to jurisdiction here anyway.
    I saw something in the NYT yesterday that the text of the EO also targets mothers on tourist visa and fathers who are here on work permits. But we'll see what the courts decide when the ACLU and others continue with their lawsuits.
     
  12. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    It worries me that I keep coming up with arguments to uphold Trump's EO. None is particularly good but there are more and more of them.
     
  13. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Oh, g-d. Can I possibly AGREE with Trump about something? The Justice Department says they will prosecute state and local officials who attempt to obstruct federal authorities carrying out deportations. They're right. The federal government has sole responsibility and authority in this area. No state or local official has the slightest right to resist.

    Not the same as assisting, though.
     
    Rich Douglas likes this.
  14. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    It would be ironic for anyone in Trump's administration to prosecute someone for obstructing justice.
     
  15. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

  16. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    A federal District Judge in the Western District of Washington just issued a temporary restraining order against the EO for 14 days. He calls the EO "blatantly unconstitutional". He's PROBABLY right?
     
    SteveFoerster likes this.
  17. TEKMAN

    TEKMAN Semper Fi!

    Well, the laws are written to be interpreted by legal professionals. It does not spell out black and white. President Trump's administration interpreted different ways, and state governments and activist groups sued the executive branch in federal court. If both parties are unsatisfied with the federal court district; they bring it up to the Supreme Court. Who knows, if the current Supreme Court will overturn the United States vs. Wong Kim Ark like they overturned Roe vs. Wade.

    Fourteenth Amendment


    Section 1

    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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
     
  18. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Judge Coughenour writes that the plaintiff State governments have standing because they need access to federal funding that will be denied if these residents are not recognized as citizens. Interesting. No plaintiff is an individual; they are all States.
     
  19. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    I don't think Wong Kim Ark is on the radar, TEKMAN. The issues are different. Both of Wong's parents were legally residing and operating a business in the country. There is no question that all of the Wongs were "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States and the State of California. The real issue, if I remember right, was that Wong's parents were ineligible for citizenship. Had they returned to China on a visit, the Chinese Exclusion Act would have kept them from returning to the U.S. Wong could return because he was a citizen by birth.

    Under the terms of Trump's EO, Wong would be recognized as a citizen today.
     
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2025
  20. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    My understanding is that the case brought by the ACLU included a plaintiff that was pregnant.

    quote:
    Many expectant couples across the United States now fear what will happen to their newborns. One such couple impacted by this lawsuit are members of New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support. They arrived in 2023, applied for asylum, and their application awaits review. The mom-to-be is in her third trimester. Under this executive order, their baby would be considered an undocumented noncitizen and could be denied basic health care and nutrition, putting the newborn at grave risk at such a vulnerable stage of life.
    https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/immigrants-rights-advocates-sue-trump-administration-over-birthright-citizenship-executive-order
     

Share This Page