Supreme Court gets it wrong on birthright citizenship. Why Trump is right to ban it
Simply put, the Supreme Court’s recent ruling striking down President Donald Trump’s birthright citizenship ban was both legally and historically wrong, as well as a misguided interpretation of the 14th Amendment.
TL;DR
- The Supreme Court's ruling against Trump's birthright citizenship ban is deemed legally and historically wrong.
- The 14th Amendment requires individuals to be born or naturalized in the U.S. and be "subject to the jurisdiction thereof."
- The "jurisdiction" clause implies owing direct and exclusive allegiance to the U.S., not just being subject to its laws.
- Children born to ambassadors or invading soldiers, or individuals owing allegiance to another country, are not considered citizens under this interpretation.
- Historical evidence, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and statements by drafters, supports the interpretation of requiring total allegiance.
- Judge Richard Posner is cited as arguing that absolute birthright citizenship "makes no sense" in cases where immigrants do not owe allegiance.
- The article concludes that Trump's executive order was constitutional and historically accurate, and the Supreme Court erred in its decision.