Former federal prosecutor reveals why Trump birthright citizenship order is doomed

23 January

A former federal prosecutor Elie Honig shot down President Donald Trump's executive order denying birthright citizenship to children of undocumented migrants Thursday — after Judge John C. Cougheneur handed the president a loss by siding with four states that sued the MAGA administration over the order.

Speaking with Honig on the latest episode of CNN's The Lead with Jake Tapper, Tapper submitted that the order will end up before the Supreme Court of the United States.

"I'm sure it will, Jake," Honig replied, "and I'm sure Donald Trump will lose this in the appeals court and in the US Supreme Court, because at its core, this is really not a liberal versus conservative, Democrat versus Republican issue. This is just a 'can you read the law' issue. Section 1 of the 14th amendment. It says any person who is born or naturalized in the United States, subject to US jurisdiction, is a citizen."

The CNN legal analyst continued, "On top of that, Congress passed a law in 1940, and then reaffirmed it in 1952, saying the same thing. And on top of all that, there is a US Supreme Court decision from 1898, but it's still good law, essentially saying the same thing: A person who was born here of noncitizen parents is a citizen. And these defenses — these responses from the Trump team saying — 'Well, it's bad policy' or 'it's bad for national security,' that doesn't matter. It's a constitutional provision. It's not about whether does it serve us well or not. it's in the Constitution. It's been reaffirmed by congress. It's been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court, and I think Trump will fail here."

Tapper replied, "Right, and we should note also that there are exceptions built into the amendment. So this has been hashed out over decades. For instance, the children of a foreign diplomats born in the United States are not automatically American citizens, etc. Donald Trump can like it or not, and obviously he doesn't, but this does seem to be established law."

"Absolutely," Honig said. "There are various exceptions. For example, certain people who are native Americans and not subject at all to certain federal laws have been carved out of this. as you said, if there was an invading force who came in here and had babies here, theoretically they would not be subject to this. but this has been hashed out. these are core questions. it's not about what's good policy or good politics. it's about what the constitution says, what the Supreme Court will say."

Watch the video below or at this link.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

From Your Site Articles