The 14th Amendment Debate – USA Gov Policy

President Trump’s decision to write an Executive Order regarding the citizenship of children born to illegal aliens has produced a broad national debate on the constitutionality of his proposal. Opponents claim that the move would violate Section One of the 14^th Amendment:

“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.”

The practical and financial need to address the issue is clear, as noted in statistics provided by The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS):

In 2014, one in five births (791,000) in the United States was to an immigrant mother (legal or illegal). CIS best estimate is that legal immigrants accounted for 12.4 percent (494,000) of all births, and illegal immigrants accounted for 7.5 percent (297,000).
The 297,000 births per year to illegal immigrants is larger than the total number of births in any state other than California and Texas. It is also larger than the total number of births in 16 states plus the District of Columbia, combined.
The estimated 28,000 births to illegal immigrants in just the Los Angeles metro area is larger than the total number of births in 14 states and the District of Columbia.
Among the native-born, a large share of new mothers (42 percent) are either uninsured or on Medicaid. The rate is even higher among new mothers who are legal immigrants (47 percent) and higher still for new mothers who are in the United States illegally (67 percent). Almost all of these births are likely paid for by taxpayers.
Of all births likely paid for by taxpayers, about one in four (429,000) was to an immigrant (legal or illegal). Illegal immigrants account for 11 percent (198,000) of all publicly funded births, and legal immigrants are another 13 percent (231,000).
CIS estimates that the cost to taxpayers for births to immigrants (legal and illegal) is roughly $5.3 billion — $2.4 billion of which is for illegal immigrants.

The specially levitra for sale online formulated Sinrex is absorbed directly into the bloodstream, and you will start to notice the results after 15 to 20 minutes of consuming the medication. Thus, this inability of the flow of blood in the arteries connected to buy levitra in uk the penis, the reverse pressure pulls extra blood from the body into the corpus cavernosa. Kamagra Oral Jelly comes as an excellent helping hand in your days of more cheapest cialis total unhappiness when you no longer enjoy your marital life. Most of organizations gives a path for the new solid anagen hair to develop. cialis online pill respitecaresa.org
Objections to the President’s plan center on whether the policy change requires a Constitutional Amendment. It is helpful to understand the historical context.

The 14th, ratified in 1868, was one of three amendments passed in the aftermath of the Civil War, which were intended to abolish slavery and establish civil and legal rights for black Americans. The 13^th ended slavery and the 15^thprohibited restrictions on voting due to race, color, or “previous condition of servitude.” It is clear, then, that the purpose of the 14^th amendment was to address the citizenship of ex-slaves.

Following the conclusion of fighting between the Union and the Confederacy, the Reconstruction-era process of incorporating the Southern states back into the national government faced a number of obstacles, including the actions by formerly rebellious jurisdictions to oppress freed blacks. Democrats continued to oppose the Republican move to recognize the former slaves as full-fledged citizens.

As History.com explains, “Though the Union victory had given some 4 million slaves their freedom, the question of freed blacks’ status in the postwar South was still very much unresolved… Even as former slaves fought to assert their independence and gain economic autonomy during the earliest years of Reconstruction, white landowners acted to control the labor force through a system similar to the one that had existed during slavery.”

The need for the 14^th Amendment to establish recognition of ex-slaves as full-fledged citizens was clear. But others born in the U.S. were not covered by it. It was not until June 2 of 1924 that Native Americans were given citizenship, when President Calvin Coolidge signed the Indian Citizenship Act, which provided that “all noncitizen Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States be, and they are hereby, declared to be citizens of the United States…”

A close reading of the first sentence of 14^th Amendment also provides a conclusion that it does not apply to births to illegal aliens and tourists:

“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.”

Even if the clear historical context of the 14^th Amendment as a means to protect ex-slaves is wholly ignored, the existence of that key part of the very first sentence specifically refutes any argument that it applies to births of illegal aliens or others merely temporarily within the nation.

Illustration: Battle of Stone River during the Civil War (Smithsonian Institution)

Quick Analysis

Russia Expanding Aggression

President Putin is using more than one pathway to enter Europe and undermine the West. While most of the world watches the conflict he initiated in Ukraine, the Russian government is actively pursuing a second front in a little noticed campaign in Cyprus. Although the corrupt Cypriot government ended its issuance of “golden passports” in 2020, Russian intelligence is functioning quietly there to transform this EU country into a Russian beachhead of illicit economic activity aimed at penetrating the capitalist West, according to Paul Goble of the Jamestown Foundation. Cyprus is not a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) nor does it receive as much attention as those countries who are member states. That adds to its allure as a prime location for Russia to attempt to gain a European foothold. Last week a NATO report, cited in the European Daily Monitor, noted that Russian intelligence agents have been plotting to destroy European infrastructure across the continent to disrupt states supporting Ukraine. It further suggests that Putin’s immediate goal is to lay the framework for a future move against the security organization’s members. Hungary, in particular, is another country garnering Moscow’s attention as it opposes the Western response to Russian aggression. Russia is focusing its intelligence efforts on other European, non-NATO member countries in addition to Cyprus, including Austria, Malta, and Ireland. The NATO report suggests that Moscow has had success in disseminating the Russian political narrative in these states to advance its campaign against the West. The island of Cyprus is proving to be a good target for Moscow as it is an ethnically divided island that is part of the EU since 2004. Northern Cyprus, officially called the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC), is a de facto state that is only recognized by Turkey. The division precludes it from joining NATO. As Goble suggests, “it offers Russia troubled waters in which to fish.” Over the last 20 years, he points out, Cyprus’ challenges have opened it to a massive influx of Russian citizens, who now comprise approximately 10 percent of the island state’s population. Over 2,900 residents are Russians who entered until the “golden passport” program that allowed wealthy or well-connected Russians to move to Cyprus. It also provided them with documentation to travel freely throughout Europe! Although less visible on the world’s radar than the war in Ukraine, Moscow is also being helped by Cyprus’ banks opposition to seizing Russian assets and its support in evading Western sanctions. Russia has placed tens of billions of US Dollars there for money laundering. It has been more than two years since a single Russian “diplomat” has been deported and, in fact, the Embassy has grown to over 300 staffers on this tiny island state of only 1.2 million people. The Russian embassy in Nicosia has advanced communications antennae on its roof and opened a consulate on the northern end of the island. Moscow’s Ambassador, Mura Zyazikov, is a lieutenant general in the FSB with no diplomatic experience. The FSB, SVR (Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service), and GRU are actively using the island as a base of operations against NATO Member states, Israel, and other Western allies. Moscow backs pro-Russian political parties who in turn influence Cypriot decisions on education, language, and other issues. “Dmitry Khmelnitsky of the Dossier Center says that its findings should be of concern not only to Cyprus but to the West as a whole. Those who ignore what Moscow is doing because Cyprus does not follow the EU sanctions regime are missing something critical,” says Goble. “Cyprus does not seek to get rid of Russian agents and does not interfere with their work,” Khmelnitsky concludes, “despite the fact that what the Kremlin is doing is so clearly visible.” This has an impact not only on the small island but on the EU, NATO, and the West in general. Earlier this year the Moscow Times reported that when the FBI became more interested in Russian business and oligarchs in Cyprus, at least 10 of the major Russian businesses operating there left. Despite the government of Cyprus’ vow to implement plans for new sanctions against Russia, it continues to ignore Putin’s atrocities in Ukraine and to shield the wealth of the 50,000 wealthy Russian citizens and oligarchs residing there. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept. Illustration: Pixabay