Exclusive: Trump to terminate birthright citizenship

Axios ^ | October 30, 2018 | Jonathan Swan, Stef W. Kight

[be-baw]

President Trump plans to sign an executive order that would remove the right to citizenship for babies of non-citizens and unauthorized immigrants born on U.S. soil, he said yesterday in an exclusive interview for "Axios on HBO," a new four-part documentary news series debuting on HBO this Sunday at 6:30 p.m. ET/PT.

Why it matters: This would be the most dramatic move yet in Trump's hardline immigration campaign, this time targeting "anchor babies" and "chain migration." And it will set off another stand-off with the courts, as Trump’s power to do this through executive action is debatable to say the least.

Trump told Axios that he has run the idea of ending birthright citizenship by his counsel and plans to proceed with the highly controversial move, which certainly will face legal challenges.

"It was always told to me that you needed a constitutional amendment. Guess what? You don't," Trump said, declaring he can do it by executive order. When told says that's very much in dispute, 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."

"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 ... with all of those benefits," Trump continued. "It's ridiculous. It's ridiculous. And it has to end." "It's in the process. It'll happen ... with an executive order."

The president expressed surprise that Axios knew about his secret plan: "I didn't think anybody knew that but me. I thought I was the only one. "

Behind the scenes:

Swan had been working for weeks on a story on Trump’s plans for birthright citizenship, based on conversations with several sources, including one close to the White House Counsel’s office. The story wasn’t ready for prime time, but Swan figured he'd spring the question on Trump in the interview.

The legal challenges would force the courts to decide on a constitutional debate over the 14th Amendment, which says:

"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."

Be smart: Few immigration and constitutional scholars believe it is within the president's power to change birthright citizenship, former U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services chief counsel Lynden Melmed tells Axios.

But some conservatives have argued that the 14th Amendment was only intended to provide citizenship to children born in the U.S. to lawful permanent residents — not to unauthorized immigrants or those on temporary visas. John Eastman, a constitutional scholar and director of Chapman University's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, told Axios that the Constitution has been misapplied over the past 40 or so years. He says the line "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" originally referred to people with full, political allegiance to the U.S. — green card holders and citizens.

Michael Anton, a former national security official in the Trump administration, recently took up this argument in the Washington Post.

Anton said that Trump could, via executive order, "specify to federal agencies that the children of noncitizens are not citizens" simply because they were born on U.S. soil. (It’s not yet clear whether Trump will take this maximalist argument, though his previous rhetoric suggests there’s a good chance.) But others — such as Judge James C. Ho, who was appointed by Trump to Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, in New Orleans — say the line in the amendment refers to the legal obligation to follow U.S. laws, which applies to all foreign visitors (except diplomats) and immigrants. He has written that changing how the 14th Amendment is applied would be "unconstitutional."

Between the lines: Until the 1960s, the 14th Amendment was never applied to undocumented or temporary immigrants, Eastman said.

Between 1980 and 2006, the number of births to unauthorized immigrants — which opponents of birthright citizenship call "anchor babies" — skyrocketed to a peak of 370,000, according to a 2016 study by Pew Research. It then declined slightly during and following the Great Recession.

The Supreme Court has already ruled that children born to immigrants who are legal permanent residents have citizenship. But those who claim the 14th Amendment should not apply to everyone point to the fact that there has been no ruling on a case specifically involving undocumented immigrants or those with temporary legal status.

The bottom line: If Trump follows through on the executive order, "the courts would have to weigh in in a way they haven't," Eastman said.

The full interview will air on "Axios on HBO" this Sunday, Nov. 4, at 6:30 p.m. ET/PT.

[PhiloBedo]

Can he make it retro-active?

[Robert DeLong]

Actually Congress is the one that should either confirm or rescind the born on our soil makes that child eligible for citizenship. That way the courts must remain silent on the issue as the Constitution clearly extends that authority to them. However, since the refuse to take it up, then President Trump has to force the issue by EO.

[Electric Graffiti]

“Enlighten me, please. It does seem a bit off that he has the ability to do this through E.O..”

Why’s that? There was/is no law passed by congress granting children born to illegal aliens U.S. citizenship. I don’t even know on what authority the states are handing out U.S. birth certificates to illegals. It’s all completely lawless

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

The left will lose their minds over this.I’m good with that.

[Trump Girl Kit Cat]

I LOVE this POTUS more with each day!!! He can do this by EO then congress can take it up AFTER the election!!!!

[Sequoyah101]

Did not work on me. Best prospect I have heard in ages.

[Sequoyah101]

Did not work on me. Best prospect I have heard in ages.

[Eleutheria5]

“And it will set off another stand-off with the courts, as Trump’s power to do this through executive action is debatable to say the least. “

Do it anyway. It’ll drive the leftards nuts, and make them spend money.

[CIB-173RDABN]

Do it. Then take it to the Supreme Court.

[SkyPilot]

Here’s the thing: Whether or not the President has the power to change this is not the point. Because Trump said it the MSM will now have to report on it. He has now introduced the topic into the news cycle which puts it on people’s radar. He is manipulating the narrative like a media jujitsu master.

Correct. The President is trolling the media.

I don't believe the President would attempt this change with just an EO. It would probably not pass court muster, even the Supreme Court with Kavanaugh. Further, the next President could overturn the EO with the stroke of a pen.

Trump is doing this to bring attention to chain migration and anchor babies, and he is doing it right prior to the midterms. If we hold onto the House and expand the GOP seats in the Senate, he will introduce this, full wall funding, and other border and immigration measures to Congress. If the new Congress turns tail and stabs the American people in the back, the President will use other means to pressure them. That's called Politics.

[Electric Graffiti]

“Can he make it retro-active?”

I don’t see why not.

[Sequoyah101]

Did not work on me. Best prospect I have heard in ages.

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

That would take care of the dreamer issue and deter the chicom breeders from flying over here to download a baby and getting citizenship.Perfect!

[Eleutheria5]

A constitutional amendment might be the only way, and this might be the opening bid to get one.

[Enterprise]

Bump!

[Trump Girl Kit Cat]

Yes the left will lose their minds over this HOWEVER the MAJORITY of the American people will AGREE with this and it will be one more thing to push them to the ballot boxes IN DROVES!!! Immigration IS the number one issue in this country REGARDLESS of the MSM saying it is healthcare IT IS NOT healthcare by any stretch of the imagination!!!!!

[Fresh Wind]

“unauthorized immigrants”

Correct term: ILLEGAL ALIENS

[Dana1960]

http://www.multiplecitizenship.com/

You can search by country. But, for example, the Mexican constitution specifically states that a child of a Mexican woman is a citizen of MEXICO, no matter where they are born.

[MagnoliaB]

Please do it Mr. President!

[gasport]

YES!!!!!!!