In a wide-ranging interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press with Kristen Welker” aired on December 8, 2024, President-elect Donald Trump reaffirmed his commitment to ending birthright citizenship, claiming that he would sign an executive order to revoke the constitutional right on his first day in office. However, experts have raised significant concerns about the legality of such a move.
Trump’s Push for Change: A Bold Promise
Trump’s remarks about birthright citizenship were unequivocal. “We have to end it,” he told Welker during the interview. “We’re going to end that because it’s ridiculous.” His statement underscored a long-standing campaign promise to limit immigration by revisiting what he refers to as the “flaw” of birthright citizenship, guaranteed under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, provides that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” Despite the amendment’s clear language, Trump remains steadfast in his belief that this provision should be eliminated.
“I’m going to try to end it, if we can,” Trump added, indicating his intention to bypass legal barriers with an executive order. But his plan to unilaterally revoke birthright citizenship is met with strong opposition from constitutional experts who argue that such a move would be illegal and nearly impossible without congressional approval.
Legal Roadblocks and Constitutional Hurdles
Trump’s proposal raises the question of whether a president can alter the Constitution through an executive order. Legal scholars argue that this is not possible. Gerald Neuman, a professor of law at Harvard University and expert in human rights law, highlighted the difficulty of making such a change through executive action.
“There is no serious scholarly debate about whether a president can, through executive action, contradict the Supreme Court’s long-standing interpretation of the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment,” Neuman stated in 2018.
Moreover, amending the Constitution is a complex and lengthy process. It requires a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate, and approval from three-fourths of state legislatures. Even if Republicans control both chambers of Congress, achieving this supermajority remains a daunting task.
Key facts to consider:
- Changing the Constitution requires a two-thirds majority in both chambers of Congress.
- Three-fourths of state legislatures must ratify the amendment for it to take effect.
- A constitutional convention could also be called by two-thirds of state legislatures.
Given these legal and procedural hurdles, Trump’s promise to end birthright citizenship may face significant challenges before it even reaches the legislative floor.
Trump’s Missteps on Birthright Citizenship Around the World
In the interview, Trump also made a controversial claim about the prevalence of birthright citizenship globally, asserting that the United States is the only country that grants citizenship to children born within its borders. This statement is incorrect.
In fact, several other countries, including Canada, Brazil, and Mexico, also grant citizenship to children born on their soil. However, Trump’s comment about the U.S. being the only country to offer this right was inaccurate. Some countries, like France, do have birthright citizenship but impose restrictions, such as requiring at least one parent to be a citizen in order for the child to inherit citizenship.
This misstep added to the controversy surrounding his policy proposal and raised questions about the depth of his understanding of global immigration laws.
What About the Dreamers?
Amid his comments on birthright citizenship, Trump also discussed his stance on the Dreamers—young undocumented immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as children. He expressed willingness to negotiate with Democrats on keeping Dreamers in the U.S., signaling a potential shift from his earlier hardline positions on immigration.
However, Trump reaffirmed his broader agenda to deport entire families, even if their children are U.S. citizens. This approach could raise significant legal and moral questions, particularly as it pertains to children who have lived in the U.S. for most of their lives.
Trump’s plan to focus on family deportations is part of his broader strategy to curb illegal immigration, which he argues is a strain on the country’s resources. But his policy proposals remain contentious, with critics arguing that they would tear families apart and disproportionately affect Latino communities.
A Controversial Path Forward
As Trump prepares to take office, his commitment to changing U.S. immigration laws remains a central issue. His plans to end birthright citizenship, whether through executive action or legislative efforts, will undoubtedly dominate his administration’s early days. But as legal experts point out, the path forward is fraught with challenges.
With ongoing debates over the fate of DACA and broader immigration reform, Trump’s proposal to challenge the 14th Amendment could set the stage for a fierce legal and political battle.
Comments