Making sense of Trump v. Barbara and Trump's E.O. "Protecting The Meaning And Value Of American Citizenship"

johnwk

Platinum Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
5,177
Reaction score
2,797
Points
930
With regard to the question “Is our S.C. vested with power to create a new category of U.S. citizenship?", the obvious answer is no, since Congress, the people’s elected representatives, are granted exclusive authority “To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization”, and by Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, the people’s elected representatives are also delegated the power to enforce the amendment by appropriate legislation.

The current case Trump v. Barbara (No. 25-365) challenging Trump’s E.O. ”Protecting The Meaning And Value Of American Citizenship” asks the court to strike down the E.O., claiming the order directly violates the Constitution, which states, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens".

The executive order, signed by President Trump on January 20, 2025, seeks to end automatic birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to illegal entrant foreign national parents, or those in the country on temporary visas.

It is asserted by Petitioners that United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) has already settled the question of whether or not children born in the U.S. to illegal entrant foreign national parents are natural born U.S. citizens upon birth, and yet, the circumstances surrounding the Wong case are by far, extremely different from whether or not children born in the U.S. to illegal entrant foreign national parents are automatic U.S. citizens.

The facts surrounding the Wong case are, Wong’s parents were permitted in the United States under the Burlingame Treaty of 1868, they were legally domiciled residents in the United States at the time of Wong's birth in 1873; had been settled in the U.S. for quite some time; they were carrying on a lawful business; and Wong's parents were not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the emperor of China at the time of Wong Kim Ark’s birth. By the above stated facts, Wong’s parents, for all intents and purposes, seemingly placed themselves under the jurisdiction of the United States within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment as it was understood by its crafters.

The simple truth is, an exhaustive review of the debates during the making of the Fourteenth Amendment is void of any evidence whatsoever to conclude its drafters, or the people when adopting the Fourteenth Amendment, knowingly and willingly intended it to include within the meaning of a natural born citizen, children born to foreign nationals on American soil who violated or subverted U.S. statutory laws upon their entry into the United States. Answering this question one way or the other turns out to be a political matter, and one to be determined by the people’s elected representatives, their Congress or President, and is a non-justiciable matter under the United States system of government and its separation of powers.

Let us not forget that our system intentionally provides for elections in order for the people to change existing public policy. Currently, unwritten federal policy, and only unwritten policy, now recognizes the offspring of an illegal entrant foreign national, born on American soil, as a natural born citizen of the United States.

Are we to forget, the good people of the United States endured and suffered under the Biden Administration’s open-border policy for four years? If a majority on our Supreme Court decides to create a new category of natural born citizenship, extending it to the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born on American soil, they will have nullified the very reason for which our Founders provided elections, and they will be undoing what a majority of voters voted for when electing Trump as their new President.

Considering the above stated facts, our Supreme Court, in accordance with their oath of office to support and defend our Constitution, must apply the reasoned approach in Luther v. Borden, and affirm that a power to decide what turns out to be a political question, is not within the judiciaries delegated authority to decide, and must be decided by the people’s elected representatives . . . their Legislature and President, or the people themselves under Article V.

JWK


”The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands [our Supreme Court] . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” ___ Madison, Federalist Paper No. 47
 
Last edited:
The writers of the 14th amendment did not anticipate that millions of third world people would illegally cross our border.
The racist and corrupt Democrat Party is conducting a demographic war against American citizens.
The phrase "under the jurisdiction" means that for birthright citizenship to apply at least one of the parents must be an American citizen.
 
The writers of the 14th amendment did not anticipate that millions of third world people would illegally cross our border.
The racist and corrupt Democrat Party is conducting a demographic war against American citizens.
The phrase "under the jurisdiction" means that for birthright citizenship to apply at least one of the parents must be an American citizen.
Yeah, subject to the jurisdiction thereof seems pretty clear to me, too. If they’re here illegally, they’re essentially jurisdictional phantoms.
I expect democrats to do a semantic twisting of that and start highspanic riots in support.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom