By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Trump administration has appealed to the Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of the president’s executive order regarding birthright citizenship, arguing that the long-held understanding of the 14th Amendment is “mistaken.” This appeal follows lower court rulings that have blocked the policy, citing the Constitution and precedent, including the case of *US v. Wong Kim Ark*. The administration contends the policy is crucial for border security, asserting that American citizenship should only be granted to those lawfully entitled. The ACLU, which has been involved in lawsuits against the order, has voiced opposition, calling the order illegal.
Read the original article here
Trump asks Supreme Court to decide whether he can end birthright citizenship, a move that’s causing ripples of concern across the nation. This all boils down to a fundamental tenet of American citizenship: if you’re born in the United States, you’re a citizen. That’s the straightforward reading of the 14th Amendment, and it’s been the law of the land for well over a century. But now, there’s a push to challenge this long-held understanding.
The core of the issue centers on the definition of citizenship and what proof of that citizenship really means. Right now, a birth certificate serves as pretty irrefutable evidence. But the question being posed is whether that’s enough. If birth certificates are no longer considered definitive proof, what would be? The implications of such a change are incredibly far-reaching. The idea that the government could potentially strip a person of their citizenship based on some revised criteria raises serious questions about fundamental rights and due process.
The potential consequences are legitimately frightening. If the Supreme Court were to rule in favor of Trump’s request, it opens the door to a scenario where the government could potentially target individuals, removing their rights and even deporting them without due process. The concerns are especially potent, given the history of this administration, where following laws has seemingly been more of a suggestion than a requirement.
The argument being presented, at its core, is about control. It’s about who gets to be considered an American and who doesn’t. Some believe this is simply a racist ploy, with intentions to curtail the demographic changes in the country. The underlying goal is to undermine the 14th Amendment.
The potential impact goes far beyond undocumented immigrants. If the Supreme Court changes course on this, it affects every single one of us. It puts all Americans on shaky ground, subject to potential government overreach. Suddenly, the security we’ve always taken for granted—the guarantee of our rights and freedoms—is under threat.
The process of getting this done involves a legal battle, including the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has the final say. Many are doubtful they will uphold the Constitution and their laws. The question is, will the Supreme Court disregard precedent, legal theory, and over a century of consistent interpretation to bend to the will of the executive branch?
The sentiment among many is clear: the Supreme Court should uphold the Constitution. There’s a desire for a definitive “no” from the Court, with the expectation that the justices will uphold the law and refuse to rewrite the rules of citizenship. However, there are worries that the court is already compromised.
If the Court were to rule in favor of allowing the president to end birthright citizenship, it could be a sign that our democracy is in crisis. The ramifications extend beyond the immediate legal implications. If the fundamental principles of citizenship can be easily eroded, it could undermine the entire structure of American society.
The process of stripping someone of their citizenship has very scary possibilities. The prospect of being rendered stateless, without rights and facing potential deportation to a place you’ve never known, is a chilling one. The idea of this power is unsettling, regardless of who wields it.
This effort is not about legal technicalities. It’s about a potential shift in the very definition of what it means to be an American. Some people are worried that this change may be used to target specific groups, and strip them of their rights. If this is successful, it could effectively give a president the power to remake America in ways never imagined, effectively removing people from the US.