Wall Street Journal Urges Trump to Drop Unconstitutional Birthright Citizenship Battle
Trump, debates Democratic presidential nominee, for the first time during the presidential election campaign/Win McNamee/Getty Images
The Wall Street Journal editorial board issued a stark plea to President Donald Trump: abandon your effort to eliminate birthright citizenship, a legal battle they argue is both unconstitutional and unwinnable. The conservative paper’s criticism follows Trump’s recent controversies, including pardoning violent insurrectionists and launching cryptocurrency offerings aimed at his supporters.
Their rebuke comes after a federal judge in Seattle temporarily blocked Trump’s executive order, which sought to deny children born in the U.S. to non-citizen or non-permanent resident parents federal recognition of citizenship. “Mr. Trump’s order purports to reinterpret the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 to guarantee citizenship for former slaves.
It states that ‘all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States,’” the board wrote. They noted that Trump’s lawyers argue the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” has been misinterpreted by federal courts and past administrations.
However, Senior U.S. District Judge John Coughenour, a Reagan appointee, swiftly rejected this argument. The Journal endorsed his ruling, highlighting historical precedent. “The Supreme Court declared in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) — a case involving a man born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrants — that the history and text of the Fourteenth Amendment demonstrate the ‘ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory,’” the editorial explained.
It emphasized that Trump cannot unilaterally change the Constitution or override Supreme Court precedent with an executive order. While Trump plans to appeal the ruling, the board believes it is a futile endeavor. “The Supreme Court is not going to be any more sympathetic to his views,” they wrote, urging the administration to redirect its efforts.
“Rather than mount fruitless appeals, DOJ would be wise to deploy more attorneys to defend the Administration’s lawful deregulatory actions against inevitable liberal challenges,” the board concluded.
The Journal’s strong condemnation underscores the legal and constitutional challenges surrounding Trump’s push to end birthright citizenship, a move that has drawn widespread criticism and skepticism even among conservative circles. Their message is clear: this fight is a losing battle that distracts from more achievable and defensible policy goals.
