However, being born in the United States may no longer be enough to guarantee the rights and opportunities associated with being a full, documented resident if President Trump has any say about it. "The plain meaning of this language is clear", he wrote. "A foreign national living in the United States is "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" because he is legally required to obey U.S. law".
It may very well.
The most notorious one was another Franklin Roosevelt order requiring that American citizens of Japanese ancestry residing in Western states be held in prison camps during World War II.
They were right the first time.
Eliminating birthright citizenship would create a new permanent underclass in the United States and could even leave some children stateless. This is not a novel idea put forth by the AG.
"That's not how the Constitution of the United States works", added Obama, who once taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago.
Why were such people excluded? This precipitated the Civil War that almost destroyed the United States.
Top department officials resigned, saying the order violated the constitutional requirement that the president "take care that the laws be faithfully executed". If a law is backed by a statute, then it can only be changed through another statute. They've fallen victim to their own irrational fear of drug-dealing, criminal-rapist, immigrant babies that do not exist. The packages include accommodations and access to common language speaking lawyers and doctors to assist with having the child and doing the legal paperwork.
"What they are saying is, if you are born on US soil subject to the jurisdiction of the United States - meaning you're the child of citizens or the child of legal immigrants, then you are entitled to citizenship", Anton told Fox News' Tucker Carlson in July.
Germany introduced a similar conditional birthright citizenship in 2000. They are not accused of racism for doing so.More news: Girl Scouts killed by truck while picking up trash in Wisconsin
None of the three cases above involved children of parents who had arrived to the United States illegally. Even if Trump doesn't change anything about birthright citizenship, the fact that he is threatening to do so is enough for his base.
When Laurence Terrazas enrolled at a Mexican university, he swore "adherence, obedience, and submission to the law and authorities of the Mexican Republic", and renounced his USA citizenship as a part of the application process.
Not for 56 years, when Congress passed the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, did Native Americans become US citizens.
This was affirmed in an 1898 Supreme Court case, resolving that children born in America to Chinese immigrants were indeed American.
ERIKA LEE: There has been such a gap between what those words say and what they have meant in the lives of everyday Americans, especially Americans who are minorities and people of color.
"Every person born within the limits of the United States and subject to their jurisdiction, is, by virtue of Natural Law and national law, a citizen of the United States".
"Hilton, who was born in Miami, speaks from a position of privilege". He retired, disillusioned in China, and never returned to the United States.
So, what about legal immigrants who are not yet naturalized United States citizens, or Green Card holders, since the latter are also considered permanent residents? It can be argued that people entering the country illegally are actively avoiding being subject to USA jurisdiction, by breaking the law.
As we saw at the beginning of this column, American woman giving birth outside the U.S. were never assumed to be giving birth to citizens of whatever country they were living in at the time.
Thus, when Donald Trump last week suggested he could and would end birthright citizenship by executive decree, the sensible reaction is to ignore his statement as the clear xenophobic electioneering stunt that it is. That is not something new, but a return to what seems to have been the original intent all along.