Wet Foot, Dry Foot

"Yesterday all the past…”

Trump reiterated this morning on Meet the Press that he intends to end birthright citizenship. When told the 14th Amendment says all persons born in the US are citizens, he said, “Well, we’re going to have it changed. We have to end it.”

— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) December 8, 2024

He also said that an immigrant merely has to set one foot (“not two feet, just one”) on American soil to be declared a citizen. Which doesn’t begin to explain why we have so many “illegal” immigrants desperately in need of deportation.

Nor is it anything near the state of the law. Obviously.🙄 

(He also said they “just have to take a test. ‘What is the Statue of Liberty?’, that kind of thing.”🗽 This allows them into the country forever. I don’t think he meant a citizenship test. He was just trotting out his racism and xenophobia. Only the right people can stay here. The rest aren’t entitled to be “citizens.”) 

Lindsey, like a dutiful lapdog, wasn't far behind:

I’m confused that Lindsey acknowledges this must be done by constitutional amendment while simultaneously encouraging Trump to defy the constitution and do it by executive order. pic.twitter.com/5lOg8euj9h

— Ron Fdilipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) December 8, 2024

Lindsey is peddling bullshit. And he knows it:

Jus soli, in legal theory, the rule or law that provides that citizenship is acquired by birth within the territory of the state, regardless of parental citizenship. Originating in English common law, jus soli serves as the basis for citizenship in nearly every nation-state in the Western Hemisphere and as the foundation for the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. It differs from jus sanguinis (“right of blood”), which grants citizenship on the basis of the citizenship possessed by one’s parent or parents. By the early 21st century, 35 countries were granting unrestricted birthright citizenship, and an additional 40 countries were providing birthright citizenship with restrictions, such as requiring one or more parents to be citizens or residents of that country or requiring the completion of a minimum residency period before birthright citizenship is granted.

And just to be clear why it matters:

The rule is often seen as a hedge against statelessness (the condition of either not possessing or being denied a nationality, which prevents an individual from obtaining services such as an education, employment, health care, or freedom of movement within a country). Statelessness often prevents individuals from accessing basic human rights in the countries in which they reside, and this condition can be passed on to future generations. The rule of jus soli effectively prevents the inheritance of statelessness by offspring. Nevertheless, a condition of statelessness may still arise, as when a citizen of one country, who, when migrating to another, cannot prove their citizenship because of missing documentation or existing documentation being discounted or ignored by officials in the new country, and thus both the migrant parent and any of their offspring born in the originating country cannot prove their nationality.

Blacks in America were denied the benefits of citizenship until the 13th and 14th Amendments.  BTW, jus soli was the law of America through adoption of the English common law until the 14th was passed.  The Amendment just made it clear citizenship applied to all born here, regardless of "race".

America also  recognizes jus sanguinus as a matter of federal (not constitutional) law. Children born to American citizens abroad (who are themselves citizens by birth) are American citizens from birth.

As Mary Trump pointed out, Donald’s grandfather was an immigrant. If his grandfather's children were born before he was naturalized, under jus sanguinus they’d have to be naturalized, too. The records required soon go much beyond birth certificates and mere place of birth. You really want that in the hands of the 50 states?  You'd be a citizen born in one, and not in the other.

Not to worry. A constitutional amendment to the 14th is not likely to clear Congress and 3/4’s of the 50. Trump is going to make noise about this, and nothing is going to happen. And not even the Roberts court is going to risk it's legitimacy again rewriting black letter Constitutional law (inventing a new "right" a la Roe is one thing; erasing the plain text of the 14th is another.)