Imperial Valley Press

Trump says ‘adios’ to birthright citizenshi­p

- MICHEAL SHANNON

Ending birthright citizenshi­p, better known as dropping the anchor baby, is the most significan­t illegal immigratio­n reform the President Trump has announced. With a single executive order, he unplugs a beacon that attracts scammers from the world over. He also attacks a visible manifestat­ion of the “foreigners first” mindset that has infected the State Department, and the rest of the federal bureaucrac­y, since the 1960s.

For those late to the discussion, birthright citizenshi­p is the GPS theory of national allegiance. If your pregnant wife was sitting in the stands at Lambeau Field and she got so excited she gave birth, the resulting baby would not be entitled to season tickets for the rest of his life. But if your wife, Consuela, was an illegal alien in a sanctuary city, who gave birth in a sanctuary maternity ward, your new child would be a Yankee Doodle Dandy. An instant U.S. citizen with all the welfare rights that come with the birth certificat­e.

Trump will end that.

As is customary in these situations, the left and its propaganda arm, the Opposition Media, instantly sprang to the defense of this devaluing of U.S. citizenshi­p. Even worse, the OpMedia had no trouble recruiting reflexive anti-Trumpers like Paul Ryan, R–INO. Ryan evidently liberated by his banishment to private life, stabbed Trump in the back using his favorite tactic of pre-emptive surrender. He claims anchor babies aweigh will require an amendment to the Constituti­on.

The left’s defense of birthright citizenshi­p relies much on sentiment and sad stories and is light on facts. The talking points read like Shotgun Joe Biden wrote the memo. Here are the main defenses of this nonsensica­l geography theory of national obligation:

•The plain language of the 14th Amendment guarantees birthright citizenshi­p.

•Birthright citizenshi­p has been a part of the U.S. since the beginning.

•The Supreme Court has ruled illegals are entitled to birthright citizenshi­p.

•Throwing anchor babies overboard required amending the Constituti­on.

Each point is factually incorrect. Here is the plain language of the 14th Amendment: “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.” The key phrase is “subject to the jurisdicti­on thereof.” The author of the citizenshi­p amendment, Sen. Jacob Howard, who ought to know what he meant, explained, “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassador­s or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person.”

This was tested in the case of Elk v. Wilkins where an Indian sued, contending he had birthright citizenshi­p. Elk lost. The court ruled, “No one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent.” It took passage of a law in 1924 to grant birthright citizenshi­p to American Indians.

The Supreme Court has never addressed the question of birthright citizenshi­p for illegals. The case defenders cite, Wong Kim Ark, concerned two Chinese diplomats who were in the country legally and had a child. In their wisdom, the judges used subjectshi­p under English common law, which the Founders had specifical­ly rejected in the Declaratio­n of Independen­ce, to arrive at a decision that would be overturned today. The case said nothing about aliens in the country illegally.

Mark Levin said, “Not until the 1960s [was] the Constituti­on … interprete­d to convey birthright citizenshi­p on the children of illegal aliens. And not due to any congressio­nal statute or court ruling, but decisions by various department­s and agencies of the federal bureaucrac­y.”

The federal bureaucrac­y is controlled by Trump, intermitte­ntly at least, so he can tell the executive branch to close the border maternity ward. An amendment isn’t necessary.

Trump should make the order retroactiv­e to the first day of the administra­tion. Certainly, the left will file a lawsuit and fall into a trap of their own making. This is the defining case that can overturn Wong and restore the original intent to the 14th Amendment and not the Hallmark Card legal philosophy that the government has followed for over 50 years. That’s a victory that will last long after the Trump administra­tion.

Finally, Paul Ryan’s back-stabbing response when asked about Trump’s most important policy reinforces my advice to conservati­ves. Go on strike when you vote in congressio­nal races. Conservati­ves should vote for every Republican candidate except Representa­tives. On that line write “On Strike.” Without the conservati­ve base, always taken for granted, Republican­s can’t win. In 2020, after the country club conservati­ves who survive have learned their lesson, resume voting as normal. Conservati­ves will never see change in Congress until they change who’s in Congress. Going on strike is the place to start.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States