Doc7505
Diamond Member
- Feb 16, 2016
- 23,825
- 42,492
- 2,430
Revisiting the Birthright Citizenship and nbC Issues
“WHEN THE PEOPLE ADOPTED THEM”
Revisiting the Birthright Citizenship and nbC Issues - The Post & Email
by Joseph DeMaio, ©2026 https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-365/392236/20260120203524283_25-365BarbaraGovtBr.pdf (Jan. 26, 2026) — INTRODUCTION Joseph DeMaio
www.thepostemail.com
As dedicated P&E readers are well aware, there is now pending in the Supreme Court the case of Trump v. Barbara. The case involves a challenge to President Trump’s Executive Order 14160 regarding the meaning of “birthright citizenship” under the 14th Amendment. Following a post by the intrepid P&E Editor here, your humble servant addressed the issue here.
The Supreme Court granted certiorari review as to one of the two cases where President Trump had petitioned for review on Dec. 5, 2025. Now, the matter is proceeding before the Court through briefing of the merits and culminating in oral arguments, likely in early 2027.
Solicitor General John Sauer’s Opening Brief (“OB”) on the merits is – with but one minor editorial comment discussed in epilogue later – beyond merely persuasive: it is compelling. Moreover, that is a conclusion which the Supreme Court – assuming that a majority of its members will find the backbone to adhere to judicial principle – should confirm in its ultimate decision. As a side-note, and to its credit as well, the OB refers to “undocumented immigrants” by their true names: “illegal aliens.”
But do not take your humble servant’s word for it, as he may be seen as somewhat biased. Read the brief (linked above) yourself. That exercise will reveal and document that the authors of the 14th Amendment intended that it operate to confer U.S. citizenship on emancipated African slaves, and not to bestow such citizenship upon illegal aliens or, for example the offspring of such illegal aliens who have invaded this nation from Mexico, Guatemala, China or Somalia…, or, for that matter, from Sweden, France, Australia or Ireland.\
~Snip~
As discussed here, the naturalization act of Mar. 26, 1790, codified as 1 Stat. 103, was repealed in its entirety by 1 Stat. 414 in 1795. While Congress reenacted and retained the “citizen” status of children born “beyond sea” to U.S. citizen parents, they were no longer to be “considered” natural born citizens, but only “citizens” of the United States.
Commentary:
This is a long and excellent overview of the Trump v Barbara case pending with the U.S. Supreme Court.
Everyone cheering this should understand what they’re asking for, a government that decides who counts as American.
That’s not border control. This is all about national ID politics. Be careful what you wish for.
Yes! It all about Birth Right Citizenship.
Our government before Trump had already decided who counts as American. They decided anyone who was born in the USA no matter their legal status.
{lease note that the Constitutional edict regarding Natura; Born Citizen's rights was based upon the 1797 "The Law of Nations [Book 1, Ch. 19,] § 212, at 101 (1797 ed.).”
"The Law of Nations: Or, Principles of the Law of Nature, Applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations and Sovereigns" is a foundational text in international law. It discusses the rights and duties of nations, the nature of sovereignty, and the principles governing international relations.
Disastrously, the Biden administration before Trump had already decided who counts as American. They decided anyone who was born in the USA no matter their legal status, violating Eurpean and world doctrine on the matter.So, this is now simply a government saying that decision was wrong once and for all by the Supreme Court Court of the United States.
The arguments for why it was wrong are clear, and pretty convincing.
