WASHINGTON - President Donald Trump says he wants to end the right to citizenship for children of non-citizens and illegal immigrants born in the United States, but legal experts warned such a move would likely be unconstitutional.
- Questions raised on his authority to make such change
- Calling for an executive order to limit immigration
- Immigration is Trump’s focus ahead of midterms
“We're the only country in the world where a person comes in, has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United States for 85 years with all of those benefits,” Trump said in an interview with Axios, a political website. “It's ridiculous. And it has to end.” Trump’s statement was factually incorrect -- at least 30 countries allow birthright citizenship, according to the Center of Immigration Studies.
Trump's comments add to the immigration debate he is trying to stoke ahead of next week's midterm election, an issue that riles up his Republican base. Earlier, the administration announced its decision to send more than 5,2000 troops to the southern border to block a caravan of migrants.
Trump’s desire to use an executive order to change the automatic right to citizenship for those born in the United States to non-citizens is a move under scrutiny among legal experts, with many cautioning it would run afoul of the Constitution, and any such order would almost certainly trigger a legal fight.
“It’s in the process. It’ll happen, with an executive order,” Trump told Axios.
The 14th Amendment, adopted after the Civil War, notes that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens.” The Supreme Court has upheld this rule for legal permanent residents, but has never weighed in on a citizenship case involving an illegal immigrant or a short-term U.S. visitor.
Trump said he reviewed the issue with legal counsel. Still, the White House hasn’t provided any other details of his plans for a new executive order regarding the 14th amendment.
Some in favor of Trump’s proposal have indicated there is a chance to make changes by filing new legislation that would change the context or meaning of the 14th amendment.
Opponents of the possible change say it would be a misguided.
“Aside from being unconstitutional, such an executive order would exacerbate racial tensions, exploit fears and drive further polarization across the country at a moment that calls for unity,” said Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
Amending the Constitution is hard, and requires approval from two-thirds of both chambers of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the states.