Trump signals plan to end birthright citizenship

Big news this morning, as President Trump announced in an interview with Axios that he intends to end birthright citizenship via an executive order.

This raises lots of questions, which I won’t try to address in this post, but suffice it to say that there will be constitutional challenges raised. The 14th Amendment was interpreted by the Supreme Court to grant citizenship to anyone born in this country, but there is reason to believe that Congress could overturn that interpretation. Now Trump is raising the possibility that the president can do so as well.

He will need the Supreme Court to back him up, which is no sure bet. Nonetheless, it is a brilliant move by President Trump to push the conversation in the right direction. Without Trump, we would not be talking about the border or sovereignty at all. With Trump, we are talking about how to save our country.

So, good on ya, President Trump.

Related Post

3 Replies to “Trump signals plan to end birthright citizenship”

  1. Thank you so much for your clear thoughts on immigration. I would hope the President, by taking a clear look at the 14th Amendment – Birthright Citizenship – will focus our attention on how to refine or discontinue this incentive for all line jumping illegal immigrants. The Chinese regularly come to the U.S. to have babies and then go home as well as the long standing Mexican intentional pregnancies where they come in a steady stream to have babies in the U.S. The legal American citizens are pushed aside and help support the new babies and their entire families who come in through chain migration through taxes, guilt, fear of looking too rich, too white, too successful. The original intent for the 14th amendment was to give citizenship to men and women who were brought to America as slaves (and who, if they had remained in those war torn countries would have no legacy today), and when freed were given Citizenship. The politicians caused this amendment to morph into an unacceptable system that is impractical, injudicious, and unfair all the way around. (There was a time when, if a journalist or politician even mentioned”immigration” they were seen as rascist. The liberals call everything they disagree with “rascist” so if everything is “rascist,” maybe nothing is rascist any more.) Quality Control measures in any corporation would investigate the root of any insidious problem, and the President, as many clear thinkers before him, arrived at the correct answer. Fix or abolish the 14th amendment. Rather than a long drawn out fight, it might be easier to just amend it. I always felt it was a Supreme Court issue and hoped Antonin Scalia would have an opinion on it. Sadly, he did not live to be part of this. I would love to see a fight over this. Common sense vs. politicians. No contest. Common sense wins. Sincerely, Joe Morrisco, Washington, DC 20003 and Bedminster, NJ 07933

  2. Mr. Miele, your comments about Paul Ryan, are clear and easy to understand. No apology to a permanent swamp creature is necessary. Where in the swamp will Ryan be working when he leaves the DC swamp? I believe that Ryan acted out of jealousy with his know-it-all 14th Amendment condescending tweet. He is “entitled” to be President, just as Hillary was entitled because he did everything a politician could and should do to be President. I repeat: Just like Hillary, he was entitled. But Ryan and Mitt were not elected President and vice president, and along comes an interloper like Trump and how dare he become President. So jealousy and power motivate the swamp creatures like Paul Ryan. Paul Ryan owes all of us an apology, but mostly to President Trump for showing a bad case of jealousy and disloyalty to him. Joe Morrisco, Washington, DC 20003, Bedminster, nj 07931

Leave a Reply