Did Trump really promise to put an end to the 14th Amendment, or is this just another mainstream spin?
This past weekend, President-elect Donald Trump sat down on NBC's "Meet the Press" for his first interview since the election. As one might expect, it was a particularly hostile interview, but Trump handled it with grace. The biggest takeaway from the interview was when the interviewer, Kristen Welker, pressed Trump on his immigration plans, specifically his plans to end birthright citizenship.
Despite Walker's claim that the 14th Amendment protected birthright citizenship, Trump defended his stance with the backing of legal scholars, who argue that birthright citizenship has to be granted within the proper "jurisdictional scope." As Glenn reiterated on his show this week, the 14th Amendment was enacted in the context of slavery "not illegal immigration. The 14th Amendment doesn't say, "Come over here, get into a hospital, have a baby, and congratulations, everybody is a citizen."
The media still pushed the narrative that Trump is trying to overstep the 14th Amendment.
But what is the truth? What is birthright citizenship, and what does the 14th Amendment actually say about it? Here is everything you need to know about the "birthright citizenship debacle" below:
The media outrage
If you have glanced through any mainstream media articles, they would convince you that Trump will repeal the 14th Amendment altogether and catapult the country back 200 years before slavery was abolished when Congress passed the Constitutional Amendment. But how do these accusations stack up to reality?
What the 14th amendment actually says
To get to the bottom of this, we have to understand what the 14th Amendment actually says and the context in which it was created.
During Trump's NBC interview, Welker "quoted" the 14th Amendment as "all persons born in the United States are citizens," but anyone who took a government class in high school can tell you that is wrong. The actual 14th Amendment says:
"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."Notice that Welker conveniently left out "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." This was no simple oversight.
First, let's define what birthright citizenship actually is and how it relates to the 14th Amendment. Birthright citizenship is an interpretation of the previously quoted section of the 14th Amendment: that by simply being born on U.S. soil, you are automatically granted U.S. citizenship. This has been the historic interpretation of the amendment. However, the border crisis has been incentivized by an abuse of birthright citizenship, which is colloquially called "anchor babies." This refers to when a pregnant woman crosses the border, gives birth, and is granted residency since her child is automatically given U.S. citizenship.
However, Trump says the clause "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" could enable the federal government to crack down on this abuse of birthright citizenship. If a person is here illegally, then they are not under the jurisdiction of the U.S., and therefore, their child would not be given automatic citizenship. This would not apply to legal immigrants who have secured citizenship, despite any claims to the contrary.
What Trump actually said
When questioned about the constitutionality of ending birthright citizenship and the possibility of using executive orders to get around the 14th Amendment, Trump's first suggestion was to pose a potential amendment to the 14th Amendment as a national vote. When Welker pushed back, Trump stressed the importance of ending birthright citizenship and conceded that, if necessary, he would use an executive order.
As usual, the mainstream media has spun a mountain out of a molehill and blown the entire issue out of proportion. They have spun Trump's reasonable and legal proposition into a dictatorial decree that would send the country back 200 years.