The Reporter (Lansdale, PA)

Trump is wrong on birthright citizenshi­p

- Marc A. Thiessen Columnist

In an interview for “Axios on HBO,” President Trump announced he will sign an executive order ending birthright citizenshi­p. When challenged on the constituti­onality of doing this by executive order, Trump replied:

“You can definitely do it with an act of Congress. But now they’re saying I can do it just with an executive order.”

This is simply untrue. The 14th Amendment — which declares, “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” — cannot be changed by executive order, or even by an act of Congress. It would require a constituti­onal amendment.

Not long ago, Trump revoked President Barack Obama’s Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals (DACA) because, as he correctly pointed out, it was an unconstitu­tional executive overreach. Now he wants to attempt to change the Constituti­on by executive order?

Some conservati­ves justify his proposed action by taking a loose reading of the 14th Amendment, arguing that the phrase “subject to the jurisdicti­on thereof” leaves birthright citizenshi­p subject to interpreta­tion. Funny, just a few weeks ago, many of these same conservati­ves during Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmati­on hearings were defending the “originalis­t” approach to the Constituti­on, which holds that we should interpret the plain words of the Constituti­on according to their original public meaning.

They were right the first time. Many of these same conservati­ves bridle at the idea that the phrase “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” in any way undermines the fundamenta­l right of private citizens to keep and bear arms.

Apparently, some on the right are strict constructi­onists when it’s convenient but suddenly discover their belief in a “living Constituti­on” when it serves their policy preference­s.

As my American Enterprise Institute colleague John Yoo explains, the originalis­t reading of the 14th Amendment is the correct one:

“The 14th Amendment’s reference to ‘all persons born or naturalize­d in the United States, and subject to the jurisdicti­on thereof’ refers to children who are born in US territory and are subject to American law at birth. Almost everyone present in the United States, even aliens, come within the jurisdicti­on of the United States.”

Yoo further points out the high court has upheld this view of the 14th Amendment:

“United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) upheld the American citizenshi­p of a child born in San Francisco to Chinese parents, who themselves could never naturalize under the Chinese Exclusion Acts. The Court held that ‘the Fourteenth Amendment affirms the ancient and fundamenta­l rule of citizenshi­p by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens.’ It also explicitly rejected the argument that aliens, because they owed allegiance to a foreign nation, were not within ‘the jurisdicti­on’ of the United States.

So if Trump moves forward, he may find that the Supreme Court — in all likelihood with the votes of his own nominees — declares his action unconstitu­tional. That would be quite a rebuke.

And even if Trump could change the 14th Amendment, that is the last thing Republican­s should want to do — both as a matter of law and a matter of principle. Because, as Yoo points out, the 14th Amendment is one of the Republican Party’s great historic achievemen­ts:

“After the Civil War, congressio­nal Republican­s drafted the 14th Amendment to correct one of slavery’s grave distortion­s of our law. In Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857), Chief Justice Roger Taney found that slaves, even though born in the United States, could never become citizens. The 14th Amendment directly overruled Dred Scott by declaring that all born in the U.S., irrespecti­ve of race, were citizens. It also removed from the majoritari­an political process the ability to abridge the citizenshi­p of children born to members of disfavored ethnic, religious, or political minorities.”

Republican­s should not be seeking to restore any elements of Dred Scott. The way to prevent illegal immigrants from obtaining birthright citizenshi­p for their children is prevent them from entering the country illegally in the first place.

Strengthen border security. Build the wall. But leave the Constituti­on alone.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States