The Wall Street Journal - What Trump Will Need to Actually End Birthright Citizenship | WSJ
The video explores the controversy surrounding President Trump's executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship, a right established by the 14th Amendment in 1868. This amendment was initially designed to grant citizenship to black Americans post-Civil War. Trump's order argues that children born to undocumented immigrants should not automatically receive citizenship, a stance that contradicts the established interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Legal experts and advocates cite the 1898 Supreme Court ruling in Wong Kim Ark, which affirmed citizenship for children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents, as a precedent. However, Trump's administration contends that this ruling does not apply to children of undocumented immigrants. The executive order faces significant legal challenges, with opponents arguing it is unconstitutional and could create a permanent underclass of non-citizens. The order's implementation could also impact federal funding for local governments based on social security eligibility. Legal scholars believe the order is unlikely to succeed without a constitutional amendment or Supreme Court endorsement, both of which are improbable. The case highlights broader issues about immigration policy and the rule of law in the U.S.
Key Points:
- Trump's executive order challenges the 14th Amendment's birthright citizenship clause.
- Legal experts argue the order is unconstitutional and cite the Wong Kim Ark case as precedent.
- The order could create a permanent underclass and affect federal funding based on citizenship.
- Implementation requires either a constitutional amendment or Supreme Court support, both unlikely.
- The case underscores broader debates on immigration policy and constitutional interpretation.