The thing about rights is that they’re hard to gain and easy to lose. This is something we are likely to see proven over and over again during Donald Trump‘s second presidency.
The former Apprentice host and his team have already stated their desire to end birthright citizenship, which has been established law in the country for well over a century. It is part of a greater crackdown on immigration, although the measures are being painted as targeting those in the country illegally, rather than people who have entered via the proper channels.
One group who nobody can claim are here illegally are Native Americans. Prior to the arrival of colonial settlers a number of tribes lived on the continent, and their presence has been a constant over the past two and a half centuries. Although their numbers were decimated by cruel and asymetrical warfare, economic malpractice, and diseases carried by unhygienic settlers and their cattle, Native Americans still represent around 2 to 3% of the total people of the U.S. So, if there is any minority safe from the Republican embrace of white nationalist rhetoric, in theory it should be this small but well established chunk of the population.
Enter the new Trump team. The failed vodka salesman’s administration has put forward an argument to end birthright citizenship that also implies Native Americans are not citizens of the country.
As per Yahoo, the Justice Department has argued that the fourteenth amendment’s wording means that simply being born on American land should not guarantee citizenship. The key phrase being questioned is “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” with lawyers claiming that this needs to be read alongside the 1866 Civil Rights Act, which came into law two years prior to the fourteenth amendment.
That earlier act excluded those “not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed,” from citizenship. The convicted sexual assaulter’s government lawyers then combine this line of thinking with a citation from the 1884 Supreme Course case Elk v Wilkins, which decided that Native Americans owe “immediate allegiance” to their tribes and not the country, and are therefore not entitled to citizenship.
This convoluted Trump-land logic has been rightfully pilloried online, with many pointing out that this particular argument is one of the dumber ones to come from an administration not known for its intellectual weight.
Justice Department attorneys argued that the “connection” between the children of those here illegally with the country is weaker than the connection America has with “members of Indian tribes.” Therefore, they argue, if the latter is not enough to guarantee birthright citizenship, then the children of non-citizens shouldn’t be considered for it either.
The fact that the Trump administration needs to point to 19th century laws to make their point should show how weak their argument is, but even if you ignore that it doesn’t make sense. This is mostly because the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 ensures birthright citizenship for U.S-born Native Americans. Then again, Trump and the Republican Party is known for treating laws as suggestions rather than rules to be followed at the threat of penalty (which makes sense, as he has managed to avoid any real punishment for his numerous crimes). Stupid? Definitely. A dangerous line of so-called logic that’s a sign of things to come? Sadly also true.
Published: Jan 26, 2025 03:21 am