Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Can Trump's Executive Order on Birthright Citizenship Survive the Courts?
Red State ^ | 01/23/2025 | Joe Cunningham

Posted on 01/23/2025 8:20:35 PM PST by SeekAndFind

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 last
To: circlecity
No - the "exact same issue" has popped up many, many times in constitutional law without MDL being created. I personally have never seen MDL that is focused solely on a question of constitutional interpretation. Have you?

MDL are for factually complex cases where there are enough common factual issues that it would inefficient to waste judicial resources with all the various circuits and districts wading through massive discovery issues, with potentially conflicting rulings etc.. They have never been used for purely legal disputes. At least not that I've ever heard of.

41 posted on 01/24/2025 6:49:20 AM PST by Bruce Campbells Chin ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin

We will see


42 posted on 01/24/2025 6:50:08 AM PST by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin

We’ll see if there is a circuit split. I’m doubtful.

If there is not, I predict the USSC will not hear the case.


43 posted on 01/24/2025 6:52:55 AM PST by Fury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: PGR88
Yes but WHY? They should NOT have used "jus soli"

Of course they should have. Colonial and American law were based on English Common law - which is still occasionally cited even today in some cases - not on the European Civil law practiced in the rest of Europe. That is one of the defining characteristics of our legal system. And English Common law at the time of independence - which is what matters - was just soli.

What the rest of Europe did then and does today is legally irrelevant.

44 posted on 01/24/2025 6:54:02 AM PST by Bruce Campbells Chin ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Fury
We’ll see if there is a circuit split. I’m doubtful. If there is not, I predict the USSC will not hear the case. I agree. Small chance they'd do a per curiam affirmance just to kill the issue once and for all.
45 posted on 01/24/2025 6:55:59 AM PST by Bruce Campbells Chin ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin
You go by the text, using the ordinary meaning of the words as they would have been understood at the time.

I agree that is the better way to go, but we don't seem to be using the better way.
46 posted on 01/24/2025 6:57:43 AM PST by fr_freak (So foul a sky clears not without a storm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Until there is a diffinitive high court ruling, Trumps EO should stand.


47 posted on 01/24/2025 6:58:05 AM PST by Mashood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin
"English Common Law" precedent - which doesn't exist today!

From the UK Govt:

A child who is born in the UK will not automatically be a British citizen. A child will acquire British citizenship by birth if they are born in the UK to a parent who is either a British citizen or who has a form of settled status, such as indefinite leave to remain, at the time of the birth.

48 posted on 01/24/2025 7:00:00 AM PST by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: woodpusher

Just think, if Ark had been elected President when he passed the age of 35, he would have been the Commander-in-Chief of all the nation’s armed forces while still being a subject of the Chinese Emperor!

With the election of Obama, and, more specifically and perhaps more frighteningly, with the example of Harris but for a successful election, this situation can still occur.


49 posted on 01/24/2025 7:31:40 AM PST by batazoid (Natural born citizen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: PGR88
What English law is today is irrelevant, and nobody claims otherwise.

What matters is what it was at the time we separated from England, because that was the default law followed by every colony, and by the new United States except where superceded by statute or the Constitution.

You can disagree if you'd like, but there are absolute boatloads of U.S. legal precedent discussing the relevancy of pre-independence English Common law when interpreting the Constitution.

Just as one really basic example, read the Supreme Court's 2nd Amendment decision in Heller. In that case, Scalia engaged in an extensive analysis of pre-independence English Common law principles and definitions to help determine the scope of the Second Amendment. Not a peep about continental European law, or current practices in England, because neither was relevant.

50 posted on 01/24/2025 7:40:25 AM PST by Bruce Campbells Chin ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Mashood
Until there is a diffinitive high court ruling, Trumps EO should stand.

Did you feel the same about all the EO's issued by Obama and Biden that were struck down by lower courts?

51 posted on 01/24/2025 7:44:13 AM PST by Bruce Campbells Chin ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Joe must not understand that it's USC 8 Sec. 1401 that is the issue and why he is using the 14th as a foil...like so many others have. Consistent with this understanding, the Congress has further specified through legislation that “a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is a national and citizen of the United States at birth, 8 U.S.C. 1401, generally mirroring the Fourteenth Amendment’s text. No changes to the Amendment needed or required. A re-examination to statutory law is all that is happening.
52 posted on 01/24/2025 10:44:23 AM PST by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yes. Read this: https://thefederalist.com/2025/01/24/trump-is-right-about-birthright-citizenship/


53 posted on 01/24/2025 1:39:28 PM PST by Doulos1 (Bitter Clinger Forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yes. Read this: https://thefederalist.com/2025/01/24/trump-is-right-about-birthright-citizenship/


54 posted on 01/24/2025 1:45:19 PM PST by Doulos1 (Bitter Clinger Forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: batazoid
Senator Howard, author of the citizenship clause, in debate upon his introduction of the clause:

Mr. HOWARD. I was a member of the same committee, and the Senator's observations apply to me equally with the Senator from Maine. We desired to put this question of citizenship and the rights of citizens and freedmen under the civil rights bill beyond the legislative power....

And so they put the matter beyond the legislative power. It was put in the Constitution where it also resides beyond the executive power.

It lies within the power of the people to amend it if they don't like it.

President Chester Arthur became Vice President and then President after being born to an alien father.

55 posted on 01/25/2025 1:51:58 PM PST by woodpusher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: radu
Not many, it seems, know that the 14A citizenship clause effected not change to the law that had been in effect since the states were colonies, or that the purpose of the citizenship clauise was to put the question beyond the legislative power. It also took care of the problem that freed slaves were not aliens and were therefore ineligible for naturalization under statute law.

Senator Howard, author of the citizenship clause, in debate upon his introduction of the clause:

Mr. HOWARD. ... This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States.

- - - - -

Mr. HOWARD. ... We desired to put this question of citizenship and the rights of citizens and freedmen under the civil rights bill beyond the legislative power....

And so they put the matter beyond the legislative power. It was put in the Constitution where it also resides beyond the executive power.

It lies within the power of the people to amend it if they don't like it.

56 posted on 01/25/2025 2:15:34 PM PST by woodpusher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 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
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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