President Trump plans to sign an executive order that would remove the right to citizenship for babies of non-citizens and unauthorized immigrants born on U.S. soil, he said yesterday in an exclusive interview for “Axios on HBO,” a new four-part documentary news series debuting on HBO this Sunday at 6:30 p.m. ET/PT.

Why it matters: This would be the most dramatic move yet in Trump’s hardline immigration campaign, this time targeting “anchor babies” and “chain migration.” And it will set off another stand-off with the courts, as Trump’s power to do this through executive action is debatable to say the least.

Trump told “Axios on HBO” that he has run the idea of ending birthright citizenship by his counsel and plans to proceed with the highly controversial move, which certainly will face legal challenges.

Revoking birthright citizenship would have immediate and far-reaching consequences. It would mean the children of illegal aliens, even if born in the United States, would not be bestowed U.S. citizenship upon birth. It would also likely deter the practice of foreigners having “anchor babies,” where they aim to give birth to children on U.S. soil so as to obtain U.S. citizenship for their children at birth.

In fact, the anchor baby population–those born in the United States to at least one illegal alien parent–has skyrocketed in recent years. According to a recent Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report, the total anchor-baby population now exceeds the annual number of U.S. citizen births from American citizens.

Trump moving forward on such plans would likely set off a legal and political battle of epic proportions, as lawsuits would come in challenging the order’s legality and the president’s authority to act via executive action on this front. But there also remains a possibility, if Republicans hold the House in next week’s midterm elections and add seats in the Senate, that a more permanent legislative fix not dependent on who is in the White House could come for dealing with ending birthright citizenship.

I agree with the spirit of this, but not the method. We don't want presidents thinking they can alter any part of the constitution with just their pen and their phone. If we're going to change the 14th Amendment, let's do it the right way.

Bingo! We collectively pissed and moaned about Obama doing the same thing. EOs arent law. All this will do is create controversy and cost taxpayers money until this is settled.

I agree with the spirit of this, but not the method. We don't want presidents thinking they can alter any part of the constitution with just their pen and their phone. If we're going to change the 14th Amendment, let's do it the right way.

Wrong. This doesn't alter the constitution. It restores enforcement of it back to it's original intent and meaning.

The sponsor/author of the 14th Amendment was very specific that it was not supposed to grant birthright citizenship to the children of foreigners on American soil. The history is clear despite the left's lies.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/08/ ... stitution/

Senator Jacob Howard was clear, the 14th amendment did not apply to the children of Native Americans, ambassadors or people who were citizens of foreign nations.

So you're saying that an EO is the proper way to handle this?

I think it would be better to get it passed thru congress...but technically it is legal.

Unfortunately, that is not up to us to decide. It will inevitably be left to the courts to decide, as this will most certainly be challenged, and I have little doubt the courts will say the president does not have the authority. I could be wrong, but I see it playing out just like that.

Wrong. This doesn't alter the constitution. It restores enforcement of it back to it's original intent and meaning.

The sponsor/author of the 14th Amendment was very specific that it was not supposed to grant birthright citizenship to the children of foreigners on American soil. The history is clear despite the left's lies.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/08/ ... stitution/

Senator Jacob Howard was clear, the 14th amendment did not apply to the children of Native Americans, ambassadors or people who were citizens of foreign nations.

Some good history.

https://www.14thamendment.us/birthright ... shW04rxak8