Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trump reveals plan to use executive order to end birthright citizenship for children of illegals
American Thinker ^ | 10/30/2018 | Thomas Lifson

Posted on 10/30/2018 8:33:38 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

Expect an explosion of media outrage and high powered lawsuits, especially in jurisdictions with Trump-hating federal judges.  President Trump has launched an October surprise.

Last night in an interview granted to Jonathan Swan of Axios, President Trump announced his plans to use an executive order to end birthright citizenship for children born on American territory to illegal immigrants and foreign citizens, presumably at least those “not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States” as required by the 14th Amendment.

The Washington Post reports

“We’re the only country in the world where a person comes in and has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United States for 85 years with all of those benefits,” Trump said during an interview with Axios scheduled to air as part of a new HBO series starting this weekend. “It’s ridiculous. It’s ridiculous. And it has to end.”

Trump, who has long decried “anchor babies,” said he has discussed the move with his legal counsel and believes it can be accomplished with executive action, a view at odds with the opinions of many legal scholars.

“It was always told to me that you needed a constitutional amendment. Guess what? You don’t,” Trump told Axios.

When told that view is disputed, Trump asserted: “You can definitely do it with an act of Congress. But now they’re saying I can do it just with an executive order.”

“It’s in the process. It’ll happen . . . with an executive order,” he said, without offering a time frame.

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: aliens; anchorbabies; executiveorder; illegals; searchworks; trump; trumpeo; trumpillegals
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last
To: SeekAndFind

Leftists want to point to the poor, downtrodden, Central American mammas struggling to survive and having babies in the USA.

But what about the Chinese “Birthing Centers” in LA and New York? In this case, wealthy Chinese women, who arrive on tourist visas, pay $50-$100K, to live in a private apartment/maternity ward for 6 weeks. They have their baby, and it is immediately granted a US passport. Then the whole family goes back to China. Of course, if there are any complications, the woman is sent to a public hospital, where taxpayers pay for all her expenses.

Is that right? Is that compassionate? is that just?


21 posted on 10/30/2018 8:56:33 AM PDT by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reno89519

RE: Hey, retroactively, this removes citizenship from Kamala Harris, Nikki Haley, and others. Even Little Marco?

Nope, their parents were here in the USA LEGALLY.

But I agree, retroactive is impractical. Make it applicable AS OF THE TIME THE EO IS IN EFFECT.


22 posted on 10/30/2018 8:56:44 AM PDT by SeekAndFind (look at Michigan, it will)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The lesson was learned long ago and is still true:

http://www.historynet.com/war-behind-the-wire-koje-do-prison-camp.htm

American experience with prisoners in Korea...no matter how well-intentioned... it’s lose/lose


23 posted on 10/30/2018 8:57:25 AM PDT by SMARTY (Hatred is a feeling which leads to the extinction of values. Ortega y Gasset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Legally qualify? I don’t think so. While some or all may have been here legally, they were not permanent residents. A pregnant Chinese mother-to-be my get a visa to come to America, then give birth. She’s here legally but that doesn’t mean the kid is a US citizen. It shouldn’t.


24 posted on 10/30/2018 9:05:29 AM PDT by Reno89519 (No Amnesty! No Catch-and-Release! Just Say No to All Illegal Aliens! Arrest & Deport!y)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Thank God almighty, we finally have a real PRESIDENT.
25 posted on 10/30/2018 9:14:19 AM PDT by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin (Freedom is the freedom to discipline yourself so others don't have to do it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMARTY
“Trump said point-blank on TV that the troops are going to be building huge tents to hold people, who will be waiting for amnesty processing.” SUCH a bad idea.

You are assuming the tents will be on US soil? What if they are being set up on Mexican soil?

26 posted on 10/30/2018 9:14:59 AM PDT by Go Gordon (I gave my dog Grady a last name - Trump - because he loves tweets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It’s in the Constitution. Executive Order VS Constitution. Constitution wins. Try something else.


27 posted on 10/30/2018 9:15:20 AM PDT by I want the USA back (The country is suffering from a hysterical obsession with race, skin color and national origin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I want the USA back

The 14th Amendment States:

“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 argument will be on the phrase: “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”.


28 posted on 10/30/2018 9:19:15 AM PDT by SeekAndFind (look at Michigan, it will)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Reno89519

And that’s why there are so many Chinese here. They have been doing this for generations.


29 posted on 10/30/2018 9:25:36 AM PDT by gawatchman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; fieldmarshaldj; AuH2ORepublican; GOPsterinMA; NFHale; Arthur Wildfire! March; LS; ...

In my view the line in the 14th “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means no birthright citizenship for children born of

1)Illegal Aliens
2)Foreign Diplomats
3)Tourists

I don’t think the authors of that amendment stuck that line in there cause they were overly concerned with a tiny number of diplomat’s kids getting citizenship.

All we need is a Supreme Court to agree.


30 posted on 10/30/2018 9:32:05 AM PDT by Impy (I have no virtue to signal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
'The argument will be on the phrase: “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”.'

So my guess is that an EO need merely to declare a judicial-esque interpretation of what this phrase means... something that SCOTUS can then validate... and declare this interpretation to be the policy of the United States for implementation of the 14th amendment's provisions.

That said, it will be important to have a SCOTUS decision so that any future administration would not be able to rescind this coming EO.

31 posted on 10/30/2018 9:33:23 AM PDT by alancarp (George Orwell was an optimist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Impy
All we need is a Supreme Court to agree.

Heheheh.....cute.

32 posted on 10/30/2018 9:34:22 AM PDT by Liz (Our side has 8 trillion bullets; the other side doesn't know which bathroom to use.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Reno89519

Take it back far enough and it will impact him as well. I believe that his paternal grandparents were illegal immigrants, Fred Trump was what would today be called an anchor baby.


33 posted on 10/30/2018 9:36:52 AM PDT by Coronal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; fieldmarshaldj; AuH2ORepublican; GOPsterinMA; NFHale; Arthur Wildfire! March; LS; ...

Even if my interpretation is not correct (waiting on legal scholars to weigh in), it should prevail anyway, libs twist the Constitution into pretzels whenever it suits them (see Roe V Wade, Dread Scott V. Sanford and a hundred other ridiculous decisions), it’s the only way we’ll ever be rid of anchor babies. The 14th amendment is not a suicide pact.


34 posted on 10/30/2018 9:41:54 AM PDT by Impy (I have no virtue to signal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Go Gordon

That’s fine, but we DO NOT need to subsidize the idea.
If Mexico cannot/will not discourage use of their country as an unimpeded conduit to the US ... then let THEM feed and assist the migrants.
America should be OUT of the ‘save the world’ business.

Nothing will ever encourage other countries of the world to look after themselves and become capable of self-government if we keep feeding them and supporting them, with NO expectation or requirement for improvement on social or political issues.

The US has been doing SO much for SO long that it’s time we cut them for bait and NO ONE can say we are uncaring or heartless.

They had continuous and very generous front-loaded assistance from Uncle Sam for many years so ...if they couldn’t get it together after decades of unstinting US help, then so be it.

Never mind that we will NEVER be repaid … not EVEN with allegiance or respect


35 posted on 10/30/2018 9:47:54 AM PDT by SMARTY (Hatred is a feeling which leads to the extinction of values. Ortega y Gasset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93

Ping to #30


36 posted on 10/30/2018 9:57:30 AM PDT by Impy (I have no virtue to signal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Impy

Rush going over this now. Your interpretation is correct. This was meant for slaves, not for invaders.


37 posted on 10/30/2018 10:03:00 AM PDT by LS ("Castles made of sand, fall in the sea . . . eventually" (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Reno89519

Read the PDF linked here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2997590##


38 posted on 10/30/2018 10:11:05 AM PDT by AJFavish (www.allanfavish.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Reno89519

And see this: http://www.federalistblog.us/2007/09/revisiting_subject_to_the_jurisdiction/


39 posted on 10/30/2018 10:13:11 AM PDT by AJFavish (www.allanfavish.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Impy

Leftists can twist 2nd amendment beyond recognition. So can they do 14th


40 posted on 10/30/2018 10:13:40 AM PDT by Lee25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson