![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/shocked-face.png?ssl=1\")
<\/a>\n<\/p>\n
Birthright citizenship has been an issue for decades if not longer. We have seen pregnant foreign nationals coming into the United States, both legally and more often, illegally and then going into an American hospital and giving birth. Their baby would then be given and American birth certificate and they would be considered American Citizens.<\/p>\n
With these birth certificates, these babies could get all the benefits of being an American citizen. However, it\u2019s very common for the mothers to leave the country with their baby. The idea was that these babies, when grown, could then present their birth certificates and be treated as native born citizens, even if they had not spent a day in the country and couldn\u2019t even speak English.<\/p>\n
This is what President Trump\u2019s EO is putting a stop to. There has always been a question on birthright citizenship. The idea comes from the 14th<\/sup> Amendment, which provided full citizenship to freed slaves after the Civil War. Here is the text of the section regarding citizenship:<\/p>\n Section 1.<\/b> 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. <\/b><\/i><\/p>\n At first glance, this does seem that if some foreign national comes here and pops out a baby, then the baby is a citizen. However, there is a part of the amendment that throws this idea into question.<\/p>\n All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, <\/b><\/p>\n The argument, and this is what the EO is based on, states that these people are NOT subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and therefore they are only citizens of their mother\u2019s country. Apparently, this has never been tested in a court of law, but it soon will be. As expected, The Democrat controlled cities and states are suing the Trump administration over this EO. Here are the details from Newsmax<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n Democratic-led states and civil rights groups have filed the first lawsuits challenging executive orders U.S. President Donald Trump signed after taking office, including one that seeks to roll back birthright citizenship in the U.S. <\/b><\/p>\n A coalition of 18 Democratic-led states along with the District of Columbia and city of San Francisco filed a lawsuit in federal court in Boston on Tuesday arguing the Republican president’s effort to end birthright citizenship is a flagrant violation of the U.S. Constitution. <\/b><\/p>\n That lawsuit followed a pair of similar cases filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, immigrant organizations, and an expectant mother in the hours after Trump signed the executive order, marking the first major litigation challenging parts of his agenda since he took office on Monday. <\/b><\/p>\n “State attorneys general have been preparing for illegal actions like this one, and today’s immediate lawsuit sends a clear message to the Trump administration that we will stand up for our residents and their basic constitutional rights,” New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin said in a statement. <\/b><\/p>\n Ok, here is my question for you. Can you show standing to file this suit? You aren\u2019t being affected by the EO since you\u2019re all American citizens, born or naturalized and are subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It seems to me, in my uneducated in legal matters, that the courts should summarily dismiss your case(s) due to a lack of standing.<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n