This is promising: it appears that President Trump is going to declare, by executive order, an end to birthright citizenship for all but legal residents. The question of whether he has the power to do this, and whether birthright citizenship as currently understood is in accord with the Fourteenth Amendment, will then be taken up by the Supreme Court. And given the current composition of the Court, there’s reason to hope for a sensible ruling.
A central figure in the debate has been Claremont Fellow (and Hillsdale College professor) Michael Anton (with whom we had a brief correspondence, and some discussion in these pages, a few months ago). Mr. Anton has galvanized the debate this year by publishing several essays on the subject: in particular, a piece in the Washington Post last July, soon followed by Birthright Citizenship: A Response to my Critics, published by Claremont.
The American Mind, also a Claremont publication, has a post online that offers an excellent overview of the debate. It is rich in helpful links. Read it here.
4 Comments
Larry Auster always maintained there was no basis for this birthright citizenship nonsense, even with the awful 14th Amendment (which should be repealed) taken into account.
And right he was. It’s an amazingly stupid and destructive idea.
I’m thinking in computer programming terms: we had a system that was working okay with fewer people all around and a less extensive welfare state, but now, with easier travel and extensive information dissemination, hackers have found a weakness to exploit; we need a patch.
What is our moral duty to follow a law that is interpreted and applied by a corrupted court system in a manner that materially damages the country?
Bomag’
bad ideology, power and profit.