In an interview with “Axios on HBO,” President Trump explained that he plans to sign an executive order that would remove the loosely interpreted Fourteenth Amendment condition that has allowed an explosion of ‘anchor babies’ to flood the United States since the 1960s.
The move would doubtless cause palpitations among liberals and spark a number of lawsuits, but many people argue that if Obama could write amnesty for millions of illegal aliens, why can’t President Trump remove a loophole concerning what many experts agree was never the intent of the constitution?
In a four-part documentary, the president said that the birthright citizenship for babies born to illegal aliens was about to be removed.
Trump said, “It was always told to me that you needed a constitutional amendment. Guess what? You don’t.”
When asked about the possible legal battle, the president responded, “You can definitely do it with an Act of Congress. But now they’re saying I can do it just with an executive order,” adding, “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 firmly stated.
The contention revolves around the fact that many scholars argue ‘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 the show that the Constitution has been misapplied over the past 40 or so years.
He explained the line “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means people with ‘full, political allegiance to the U.S., such as green card holders and citizens.’
Michael Anton, a former national security adviser for Trump, pointed out in July that “there’s a clause in the middle of the amendment that people ignore or they misinterpret… subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
“What they are saying is, if you are born on U.S. soil subject to the jurisdiction of the United States – meaning you’re the child of citizens or the child of legal immigrants, then you are entitled to citizenship,” Anton told Tucker Carlson. “If you are here illegally, if you owe allegiance to a foreign nation, if you’re the citizen of a foreign country, that clause does not apply to you.”
He also explained to the Washington Post the president could, with an executive order, “specify to federal agencies that the children of non-citizens are not citizens” simply because they were born on U.S. soil.
‘Until the 1960s, the 14th Amendment was never applied to undocumented or temporary immigrants,’ Eastman explained.
Between 1980 and 2006, the number “anchor babies” recorded was approximately 370,000, declining slightly over the next few years, according to a 2016 study by Pew Research.
The Supreme Court has ruled that children born to actual immigrants “who are legal permanent residents have citizenship.”
However, there has been no specific ruling regarding those babies born to illegal aliens or those with temporary status.
If the president finalizes this move, which was supposed to be secret, but Axios learned of it through White House ‘sources,’ many people agree that such a definition of the law would be a positive move toward controlling unlawful immigration.