(Daily Signal)—Legal experts are debating the interpretation of the 14th Amendment inside and outside of courtrooms this week.
The amendment has often been interpreted to mean anyone born in the United States is automatically a U.S. citizen, and yet its interpretation may not be that simple, according to Kurt Lash, professor at the University of Richmond School of Law.
“Often called the birthright citizenship clause, this text actually requires more than birth to become a national citizen,” Lash said during a debate on the subject sponsored by The Federalist Society on Tuesday.
“One must also be born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,” Lash, who is also a contributor to The Federalist Society, continued. “The meaning of that second requirement remains a subject of significant debate, in particular whether it applies to persons born to noncitizen parents illegally in the United States or to noncitizen parents only temporarily in the country.”
Lash moderated the debate on the interpretation of the 14th Amendment just two weeks after President Donald Trump signed an executive order declaring the end of birthright citizenship to children born to illegal aliens.
The 14th Amendment declares that “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.”
Trump’s executive order focuses on the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” and holds that those born to parents who are not in the U.S. legally are not subject to U.S. jurisdiction and are therefore not legal citizens.
The amendment “does not include the U.S.-born children of travelers just passing through or temporarily residing here who otherwise claimed no allegiance to the nation, to our government, because that child at the time is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,” Amy Swearer, a senior legal policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation, said.
Swearer argued there is a great deal of room to debate the 14th Amendment and pointed out that legal scholars have done so for years.
John Yoo, a professor of law at the University of California at Berkeley, disagrees with Swearer and argues that the “traditional reading” of the amendment is the “correct” one.
The Trump administration’s recent interpretation of the amendment has triggered multiple lawsuits, including lawsuits from 22 state attorneys general and the American Civil Liberties Union.
In January, U.S. District Judge John Coughenour temporarily blocked Trump’s executive order until Feb. 6. This week, multiple hearings are scheduled to consider the order, which, if not blocked again, will take effect on Feb. 19.
On Thursday, Coughenour will consider whether to issue a preliminary injunction that would further prevent the Trump administration from enforcing the executive order. And on Friday, a hearing will be held to consider a lawsuit brought by 18 states challenging the order, according to ABC News.
Meanwhile, on Monday, 18 House GOP members led by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, signed a 23-page friend-of-the-court brief backing Trump’s executive order to end automatic birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens.
Given the significant legal implications and controversy over Trump’s order, many speculate that the case, or cases, will eventually get to the Supreme Court for the nine justices to finally clarify the meaning of the 14th Amendment.
Independent Journalism Is Dying
Ever since President Trump’s miraculous victory, we’ve heard an incessant drumbeat about how legacy media is dying. This is true. The people have awakened to the reality that they’re being lied to by the self-proclaimed “Arbiters of Truth” for the sake of political expediency, corporate self-protection, and globalist ambitions.
But even as independent journalism rises to fill the void left by legacy media, there is still a huge challenge. Those at the top of independent media like Joe Rogan, Dan Bongino, and Tucker Carlson are thriving and rightly so. They have earned their audience and the financial rewards that come from it. They’ve taken risks and worked hard to get to where they are.
For “the rest of us,” legacy media and their proxies are making it exceptionally difficult to survive, let alone thrive. They still have a stranglehold over the “fact checkers” who have a dramatic impact on readership and viewership. YouTube, Facebook, and Google still stifle us. The freer speech platforms like Rumble and 𝕏 can only reward so many of their popular content creators. For independent journalists on the outside looking in, our only recourse is to rely on affiliates and sponsors.
But even as it seems nearly impossible to make a living, there are blessings that should not be disregarded. By highlighting strong sponsors who share our America First worldview, we have been able to make lifelong connections and even a bit of revenue to help us along. This is why we enjoy symbiotic relationships with companies like MyPillow, Jase Medical, and Promised Grounds. We help them with our recommendations and they reward us with money when our audience buys from them.
The same can be said about our preparedness sponsor, Prepper All-Naturals. Their long-term storage beef has a 25-year shelf life and is made with one ingredient: All-American Beef.
Even our faith-driven precious metals sponsor helps us tremendously while also helping Americans protect their life’s savings. We are blessed to work with them.
Independent media is the future. In many ways, that future is already here. While the phrase, “the more the merrier,” does not apply to this business because there are still some bad actors in the independent media field, there are many great ones that do not get nearly enough attention. We hope to change that one content creator at a time.
Thank you and God Bless,
JD Rucker
