Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order Gains Surprising Legal Support—A Potential Game-Changer

In a development that has stunned many liberals and energized conservative supporters, two prominent law professors from Georgetown Law School and the University of Minnesota have published an opinion piece in The New York Times suggesting that President Trump may have a strong legal case to end birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants.

Their analysis, which directly challenges decades of judicial precedent, has already sent ripples through legal and political circles—and it might force a Supreme Court showdown that redefines an integral aspect of American constitutional law.

For decades, the interpretation of the 14th Amendment has rested on the Citizenship Clause, which states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.

” Historically, this clause was intended to secure citizenship for the children of former slaves. However, over time, federal courts have broadened its application to include virtually everyone born on U.S. soil, regardless of the legal status of their parents.

The law professors argue that the original meaning of the clause did not encompass children of illegal immigrants.

“Has a citizen of another country who violated the laws of this country to gain entry and unlawfully remain here pledged obedience to the laws in exchange for the protection and benefit of those laws?” they ask.

According to their analysis, the answer is no. They contend that the parents who enter the country unlawfully do not provide the necessary allegiance required by the text of the Amendment.

In their view, the citizenship guarantee was designed for those who demonstrate loyalty and submission to U.S. law—a criterion not met by individuals who enter through defiance of immigration laws.

These professors suggest that if the justices eventually take up the issue, they might conclude that Trump’s executive order has a far stronger constitutional foundation than many of his critics believe.

Related Posts

I have to take care of someone else’s child while her mother is having fun at parties

From the moment I saw Molly, I was captivated by her beauty. But her boyfriend left her when she got pregnant. She cried on my shoulder, and…

Supreme Court Reinstates

The U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) at the federal government’s request while a legal challenge continues. The emergency stay blocks a judge’s injunction…

Trump Border Czar Vows Jail Time for FBI Leakers Over ICE Raid Secrets

Border czar Tom Homan has issued a stark warning to anyone leaking sensitive information about upcoming ICE operations, claiming that those responsible—if found—will face jail time, lose…

Donald Trump officials desperate to rehire people working on bird flu outbreak after accidentally firing them

The USDA admitted to accidentally firing several employees working on the federal bird flu response, including three from the National Animal Health Laboratory Network. The H5N1 outbreak…

Donald Trump has very bizarre reaction to people calling Elon Musk the president

Some Democrats have taken to calling Elon Musk “President Musk” in a mix of jest and concern after his appointment as head of Trump’s newly established Department…

A Single Dad’s Unexpected Morning Surprise Turns Into a Life-Changing Friendship

Life as a single dad isn’t easy. For Jake, a hardworking father of two little girls, every day was a new challenge. Ever since his wife decided…

Leave a Reply