Within hours of taking the presidential oath of office on January 20 of next year, Donald Trump is expected to sign a controversial executive order that will declare birthright citizenship to be illegal, thereby allowing federal officials to begin deporting hundreds of thousands of people who were born in the United States.
Such a plan, however, would seem to run afoul of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which reads:
“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.”
If you’re born or naturalized in the United States, no state can deny that you’re a citizen. It’s just that simple. You were born here, and that’s the only requirement for U.S. citizenship.
Trump, however, has his own interpretation of the law, and will likely try to impose it on the country despite what the 14th Amendment says, according to a thought-provoking article by Myah Ward and Betsy Woodruff Swan of Politico.
“The effect of Trump’s order would be to exclude the children of undocumented immigrants and short-term visitors to the U.S. from the right to citizenship by birth that is established under the 14th Amendment. And while there are few details on what exactly he would do and how sweeping the action would be, immigration restrictionists say Trump could do several things, including directing the State Department to refuse to issue passports to children without proof of the parents’ immigration status or the Social Security Administration to withhold Social Security numbers.”
In doing so, Trump would technically be in direct violation of the law, and that’s where things would get even more interesting, because at some point the U.S. Supreme Court would have to join the debate.
How would the high court rule? According to Hans von Spakovsky, senior legal and judicial studies fellow at the Heritage Foundation, the 6-3 conservative majority on the court will back Trump.
“What will happen is, the government will get sued, and it’ll go up to the Supreme Court, and we’ll finally get a final decision on this issue,” Spakovski predicted. “The last case on this was 1898, so it’s a very long time ago. And I actually think when the Supreme Court looks at this, they will realize and uphold what Trump does.”
There might also be another possible solution, but since it involves compromise, it seems unlikely to be amenable to Trump or other hardliners who are expected to be part of his next administration.
Specifically, Trump could propose a pathway to citizenship for beneficiaries of the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, who are also known as “Dreamers,” in exchange for allowing millions of other immigrants to be deported. However, such a move would potentially lead to the erosion of other rights in the future, perhaps meaning that every American would have to prove their right to be a citizen or face expulsion.
Beatriz Lopez, co-executive director of the Immigration Hub, says giving in to Trump’s threats will weaken every American’s rights.
“We take Trump at his word and his track record. We recognize this set-up: It’s Lucy and the football where citizenship for Dreamers is a possibility if Democrats are willing to change the constitution to end birthright citizenship and deport the parents of Dreamers and millions of other undocumented people.”
“That’s not a compromise; that’s a ransom letter.”
A ransom letter that could wind up leading to dictatorial rule that hasn’t been seen since Germany in the 1930s. And we all know how that ended.
