Trumpโ€™s Executive Order on Birthright Citizenship

What Does the Executive Order Claim to Accomplish?

The executive order is prospective. It purports to deny citizenship to future babies born in the United States if (1) the babyโ€™s mother is unlawfully present in the United States and (2) the babyโ€™s father is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.[1]

What is the Legal Basis for the Executive Order?

The 14th Amendment provides, โ€œAll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States …โ€ 

Thus, if you want to argue that babies born in the United States to undocumented parents are not citizens, then you have to hang your hat on the words โ€œand subject to the jurisdiction thereof.โ€ And you have to make a very strained and slanty-eyed interpretation of that phrase. 

That strained interpretation is the position Trump takes in the executive order. 

A Frontal Challenge to an 1898 Supreme Court Case

Back in 1898, the Supreme Court consideredโ€”and rejectedโ€”the legal position that Team Trump now espouses. So Trump has to argue (among other things) that the Supreme Court got it wrong in 1898, and that the law has stayed wrong for the past 127 years.

Four Ways to Read the Executive Order

(1) A Test Case before the Supreme Court. A charitable reading is that the executive order is intended as the predicate to a test case, in which the Supreme Court would revisit the issue it decided back in 1898. 

Trump may argue that itโ€™s OK to set up a test case. After all, we all have a constitutional right to be wrong, and we all, including His Most High Excellency, have a right to ask the Supreme Court to embrace our erroneous legal claims.[2]

(2) Defiance of the Supreme Court. An uncharitable reading of the executive order is that Mango Mussolini claims that HE ALONE, not the Supreme Court, may divine the definitive definition of the words in the Constitution. 

(3) Evasion of Supreme Court Review, or, the Cuter Than Bambi Reading. A third interpretationโ€”perhaps even more uncharitable, though very possibly accurateโ€”is Team Trump is attempting to evade Supreme Court review of his novel constitutional argument by 

  • losing all the cases brought by people aggrieved by the order,ย 
  • avoiding all appeals of such losses, andย 
  • enforcing their erroneous legal interpretation against everybody else.ย 

Some lawyersโ€”not that many, but someโ€”are under the impression that they are cuter than Bambi. This is the sort of horseshit that they come up with. 

(4) The FAFO Reading. Lastly, one may read the executive order as implying that Team Trump hasnโ€™t thought through how to get their novel legal theory accepted. Under this interpretation, they just plan to Fuck Around and Find Out.

What about Retrospective Application of Trumpโ€™s Position against Birthright Citizenship?

Someone other than me must surely have spotted this issueโ€”but, if so, I havenโ€™t seen any evidence of it. Hereโ€™s the issue. 

Suppose thatโ€”some way, somehowโ€”Team Trump gets the courts to all enforcement of the executive order in respect of future babies born to undocumented immigrants. Bear with me on that. Just entertain the supposition.

Logically, that would imply everybody already born in the United States to undocumented parents also lacks U.S. citizenship. 

Would Team Trump be prepared to take that position?

Thatโ€™s at least five million people, and probably more.


[1] The order also addresses another distinct issue/problem, that of โ€œbirth tourism.โ€ Thatโ€™s an interesting issue, but pales in importance compared to the issue of babies born to undocumented immigrants.

[2] That right flows from the First Amendment right to petition for redress of grievance. And, BTW, Trump also has a constitutional right to ask Congress to pass a law endorsing his view of citizenship. But that wouldnโ€™t work, because any such law would be unconstitutional unless and until the Supreme Court changes its mind about its 1898 interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment. 

War and Peace

The Great Warrior

Washington Post, U.S. initial damage report: Iran nuclear program set back by months, not obliterated

An alternative title might be, โ€œDefense Intelligence Talks, Bullshit Walks.โ€ 

Mango Mussolini is fit to be tied:

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt pushed back on the reportโ€™s conclusions, while not denying its existence. โ€œThis alleged โ€˜assessmentโ€™ is flat-out wrong and was classified as โ€˜top secretโ€™ but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community,โ€ Leavitt wrote on X.

โ€œThe leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iranโ€™s nuclear program,โ€ she wrote. โ€œEveryone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000 pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration.โ€ …

Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Illinois), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, told The Washington Post there is widespread belief in Congress that the embarrassing content of the assessment is the reason why the Trump administration decided to delay the classified briefing. โ€œโ€œThey donโ€™t delay briefings that have good news,โ€ Quigley said.

Quigley declined to discuss the contents of a classified briefing he received earlier this week. But he said that for years heโ€™s been told by U.S. intelligence officials that any aerial attack on Iranโ€™s nuclear facilities would not have a lasting impact.

โ€œIโ€™ve been briefed on the likelihoods of how this would play out for years, and I was always told you have to finish the job with troops on the ground,โ€ he said. โ€œNothing has changed my mind on that.โ€

The Great Peacemaker

At War With Iran: Ed Luceโ€™s Observations

Edward Luce (Financial Times): Trump has opened a Pandoraโ€™s box:

They say with Donald Trump that accusation is confession. Having warned during the 2024 campaign that Joe Biden, then Kamala Harris, would trigger โ€œworld war threeโ€, Trump is now offering a perilous test of that proposition. In his statement on Saturday night, Trump pronounced his military strikes on Iran a success. Americaโ€™s bunker-busting bombs had obliterated Iranโ€™s nuclear capacity, he said. It could take a while to find out whether both Iran and Israel โ€” the prime actors in a show that Trump did not script but in which he is now taking a starring role โ€” will share the US presidentโ€™s assessment. But Trump is hoping that his awesome display of power will bring the curtain down on the war. That is not his decision to make. 

Whatever happens next, it is worth recalling how Trump got here. Ten days ago, Benjamin Netanyahu torpedoed Trumpโ€™s nuclear negotiations with Iran with a series of devastating missile strikes. Israelโ€™s prime minister said that Iran was weaponising its nuclear programme and posed an existential threat. Most others, including the US intelligence community, do not share Netanyahuโ€™s diagnosis. Having his desired deal scuppered by Israelโ€™s move, Trump quickly associated himself with it. He demanded Iranโ€™s unconditional surrender and said that he could take out the regimeโ€™s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, at any point. Iran did not submit to Trumpโ€™s demand. His de facto declaration of war on Saturday night was the outcome. 

It also bears stressing that nobody, including Trump, knows what will happen next. It is easy to start a war, especially if you command the most powerful military on Earth. But wars only end when one side gives up. That age-old warning about the fog of war is particularly relevant to todayโ€™s Middle East, in which there are often more than two warring parties. The enemy of your enemy can turn out also to be your enemy. Having once been lectured by a younger Netanyahu, Bill Clinton said to an aide, โ€œWhoโ€™s the fucking superpower here?โ€ Trumpโ€™s brief televised address following the strikes was meant to showcase his command of the situation. In reality, Netanyahu has been dictating events. But even he cannot predict how Iran will respond. 

Netanyahuโ€™s interests are not the same as Trumpโ€™s. Israelโ€™s leader has made it clear he wants regime collapse in Iran. Trump wants Iran to surrender. The first would be precipitated by a strong Iranian response that left Trump no choice but to escalate โ€” a prospect he threatened in his address. The second would involve a token Iranian retaliation that enabled Trump to declare mission accomplished. How this unfolds, and who gets to diagnose whether Iranโ€™s actions are token or lethal, is largely out of Trumpโ€™s hands. This leaves him as the most powerful military actor in the Middle East but potentially a hollow one. Power is about the ability to shape events. Trump is largely their prisoner. 

Whatever happens, Trumpโ€™s bombing of Iran has defined his presidency at home as well as abroad. This is Trumpโ€™s war now. Iranโ€™s submission would reverberate to his advantage in many ways; a full-blown war could sink his presidency. Among the ironies, Trumpโ€™s Iran strikes are being cheered on by many of the โ€œNever Trumpersโ€ who had been warning so starkly of Trumpโ€™s autocratic impulses. They are prepared to risk the power-aggrandising opportunity that war will offer Trump. Another irony is Trumpโ€™s Maga allies, such as Steve Bannon, are among the biggest sceptics of this latest, and potentially most dramatic, chapter in the โ€œforever warsโ€ that Trump has vowed to end. 

Only a fool would take Trump at his word, which he serially breaks. But it is safe to say that his ambition of winning the Nobel Peace Prize is unlikely to bear fruit. Without consulting Congress, and in probable contravention of international law, Trump has taken a fateful gamble. Whether he has fully digested this fact or not, he is now committed to seeing this through to the end. Iran and Israel will have at least as big a say as Trump in deciding when and how that happens. 

I Think Mango Mussolini is Going to TACO on Attacking Iran: As He Said Today, โ€œI may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what Iโ€™m going to do.โ€

I apologize for sharing my speculationโ€”because my speculation probably doesnโ€™t add much to your knowledge. But Iโ€™ll say this: it is speculation based on past behavior and based on my logical extrapolation of past behavior. 

Netanyahu set him up. Netanyahu played him like a fiddle. And he doesnโ€™t like that. 

He has said for a very long time that he hates getting involved in conflicts in the Middle East.

And attacking Iran looks like itโ€™s going to lead to a very long conflict. 

Mango Mussoliniโ€™s Moronic Manufactured Mayhem

Today, many talking heads are talking about the events in Los Angeles as a step on the road to authoritarianismโ€”and an attempt to distract from Team Trumpโ€™s many failures.

All true.

And yet there remains an elephant in the room for Team Blue.

As a movement, we do not yet have a coherent and politically viable answer about

  • How to deal with the undocumented people currently present here,ย 

or about

  • What the rules and procedures for political asylum ought to be,

or about

  • Apart from people with legitimate asylum claims, how manyโ€”and whoโ€”should be permitted to enter the United States.

Not to have coherent and politically viable answers to these questions is political malpractice.