Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
Latin Times
Latin Times
Politics
Michelly Teixeira

Trump's Birthright Citizenship Promise Sparks Legal Debate Over Constitutionality

Trump’s plan to end birthright citizenship could reshape U.S. immigration policy, igniting legal battles. (Credit: Pixabay)

One of Donald Trump's immigration grievances was the fact that the children of immigrants were American citizens at birth. He raged against the concept of "anchor babies.". The now president elect repeatedly claimed that he would end birthright citizenship through an executive order, a move that experts say would lead to a major legal battle potentially reaching the Supreme Court.

His plan, which echoes his 2017 travel ban from Muslim-majority countries, aims to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants.

Trump, who has made similar promises since his 2016 campaign, reiterated his stance in a campaign video, promising that he would end this constitutional right on his first day back in office, explaining that the U.S. is one of the few countries granting citizenship to children of non-citizens or undocumented parents at birth.

"It's one of the biggest misunderstandings of the law," he said, adding that birthright citizenship incentivizes illegal immigration and "birth tourism," where foreign nationals visit the U.S. to ensure their children are born as American citizens.

What is birthright citizenship?

This is a principle rooted in the 14th Amendment, which states, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." Established after the Civil War, the amendment was meant to guarantee citizenship to freed slaves and their descendants, regardless of parental status. However, some immigration restrictionists argue that the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction" excludes children of undocumented parents.

Legal scholars across the political spectrum have largely rejected this view, as reported by Noticias Telemundo. Omar Jadwat, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, warned that attempting to bypass the 14th Amendment would dismantle core constitutional protections. Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which supports immigration limits, acknowledged that the Supreme Court could challenge Trump's order, but suggested that a constitutional amendment would be required for a permanent change.

In a related proposal, Trump's team suggests that Social Security numbers and passports would require proof of parental immigration status, an idea immigration advocates say could disrupt the registration process for all children born in the U.S. Emma Winger from the American Immigration Council noted this would introduce new bureaucratic steps, saying, "People have always relied on birth certificates alone. This would be a radical shift."

© 2024 Latin Times. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.