Ken Cuccinelli: Ending Birthright Citizenship Does Not Require Constitutional Amendment

Breitbart: Acting United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Ken Cuccinelli says there is no Constitutional Amendment needed to end the nation’s birthright citizenship, whereby millions of illegal aliens have been able to secure their U.S.-born children American citizenship.

During the Christian Science Monitor‘s breakfast with Cuccinelli, the acting director said he does not believe that an amendment to the Constitution is necessary for the U.S. to end its birthright citizenship policy.

“I do not, at least I have a belief on it, that I do not believe you need an amendment to the Constitution,” Cuccinelli said. “I think the question is ‘Do you need congressional action or can the executive act on their own?’”

To date, the U.S. Supreme Court has never explicitly ruled that the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens must be granted automatic American citizenship, and a number of legal scholars dispute the idea.

Many leading conservative scholars argue the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment does not provide mandatory birthright citizenship to the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens or noncitizens, as these children are not subject to U.S. jurisdiction as that language was understood when the 14th Amendment was ratified. read more

10 Comments on Ken Cuccinelli: Ending Birthright Citizenship Does Not Require Constitutional Amendment

  1. So-called birthright citizenship is a huge attractant for illegal immigration. It is also the basis for “birth tourism” by the Chinese and others from Asian countries. It must be stopped.

    15
  2. whereby millions of illegal aliens have been able to secure their U.S.-born children American citizenship

    My, what a crunchy blue “argument”.

    (Americans withdrawing their “consent” from The United States, also ends Birthright Citizenship™.)

    (Oh, and also does not require a Constitutional Amendment.)

    5
  3. Democrats can make constitutionally protected rights out of thin air. It’s the inconvenient constitutional rights that they call loopholes.

    5
  4. You simply need for SCOTUS to do a proper interpretation. Which at this point will mean a 5-4 vote because four justices have no interest in what is right.
    Maybe wait until RBG leaves then for a little more certainty?
    And then trigger it with a president’s EO.

    11
  5. If somehow America gets a super-majority in the House & Senate and Trump is reelected, I am all for legislation being passed ending the 14th Amendment’s vague BS anchor baby loophole.

    Allow the current anchor babies to stay but from here on out? Vamoose with your papoose!

    7
  6. @mansfield lovell October 17, 2019 at 10:17 am

    > Allow the current anchor babies to stay but from here on out? Vamoose with your papoose!

    I’ve been told (by “patriotic” United Statesians) that math is hard. And that can’t be fake news. Since I can’t suss out how your “solution” solves anything.

    1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.




Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!