North Carolina’s “Pretty Boy” AG Already Sues Trump– Over Birthright Citizenship

The socialists’ ploy is to depict these folks as moderates. But as soon as they arrive in office, they prove otherwise.

Our new democratic socialist State Attorney General, Jeff Jackson, has sued the Trump Administration within 24 hours of the executive order banning birthright citizenship.

Trump’s move is critical to assure that US citizenship is not granted based on illegal actions; and that our voting population does not send us further down the drain in a manner divorced from American history, tradition, law and economics. The Democrats’ objective is cultural Marxism– i.e., changing the voting population so that our country is transformed to the extent that it is a Marxist state instead of a constitutional republic.

I hope the US Supreme Court ultimately upholds Trump’s order.

Share:

8 thoughts on “North Carolina’s “Pretty Boy” AG Already Sues Trump– Over Birthright Citizenship

    1. I hope so, Fred. And it would be great if the Supreme Court were to reverse its previous precedent. It should justifiably do so.

      If it is true that there is a federal statute, Fred, that might pose a problem for Trump with respect to what he is trying to do. It would be interesting to know what the statute actually says. The key is the phrase “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”.

  1. This is a sticky wicket . Several attempts have been , unsuccessfully, made in congress to overturn Wong Kim Ark*

    *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

    1. Getting 60 votes in the Senate is very difficult, Fred, given the fact that the socialists are utterly invested in open borders to effect Marxism and to dilute the influence of white Americans.

      The courts may be our best chance at fixing this, if they will hear it. Would they overturn the precedent you cite as well as the statute? I don’t know, but arguments certainly could be made advocating for this.

  2. Trump Ended Birthright Citizenship, but Legal Challenges Are Doomed to Fail:

    By Matt Margolis
    Jan. 22, 2025

    President Donald Trump was so busy on his first day in office that it’s been a challenge to cover everything that he did.

    The best way to know which are the best ones to discuss is to look at the way Democrats are reacting to them. His pardon of J6 prisoners was a big one; they’re really up in arms about that. Another one was his executive order ending birthright citizenship for children born to illegal immigrants in the United States.

    Now, Democrat attorneys general from 22 states are suing over the executive order.

    Trump’s roughly 700-word executive order, issued late Monday, amounts to a fulfillment of something he’s talked about during the presidential campaign. But whether it succeeds is far from certain amid what is likely to be a lengthy legal battle over the president’s immigration policies and a constitutional right to citizenship.

    The Democratic attorneys general and immigrant rights advocates say the question of birthright citizenship is settled law and that while presidents have broad authority, they are not kings.

    “The president cannot, with a stroke of a pen, write the 14th Amendment out of existence, period,” New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin said.

    The White House said it’s ready to face the states in court and called the lawsuits “nothing more than an extension of the Left’s resistance.”

    These challenges are doomed to fail.

    The Associated Press claims that birthright citizenship is “the right to citizenship granted to anyone born in the U.S., regardless of their parents’ immigration status” and insists that anyone “in the United States on a tourist or other visa or in the country illegally can become the parents of a citizen if their child is born here,” and that this right is “enshrined in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.” The problem is that it doesn’t.

    According to Amy Swearer, senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, while the Constitution acknowledges birthright citizenship for certain U.S.-born individuals, textualist and originalist interpretations of the Citizenship Clause “undermine assertions that birthright citizenship must be applied universally to all persons born on U.S. soil, regardless of the immigration status of the parents.”

    The framers and ratifiers of the Fourteenth Amendment had a distinct understanding of the Citizenship Clause’s jurisdictional element that is incompatible with true jus soli. The Clause’s purpose was to ensure that there would no longer exist in the United States a class of persons relegated to perpetual noncitizen status on the basis of race, despite not owing allegiance to any other foreign or tribal power.

    This more limited application of birthright citizenship was adopted by the earliest commentaries on and Supreme Court assessments of the amendment. Supreme Court precedent itself extends only to the premise that the U.S.-born children of lawfully present, permanently domiciled aliens are citizens even where the parents are excluded from naturalization. This limited premise is consistent with the Amendment’s purpose of foreclosing the possibility that the United States would create generations of permanent resident noncitizens who nevertheless owe permanent and undivided allegiance to the United States.

    The legal challenges will ultimately serve a greater purpose, as they will eventually result in the Supreme Court finally having a say in the matter, and the court is going to acknowledge what the 14th Amendment was actually about and rule accordingly.

    So bring it on, Democrats!

    1. I hope this interpretation prevails, Fred. I agree with it, although you can never be sure about the Supreme Court.

      And then there is the question of what the statute says, and whether it would survive being challenged.

  3. Chuck Schumer in 2009:

    -Americans don’t like illegal immigration
    -“Illegal immigration is wrong”
    -People illegally in the U.S. are “illegal aliens,” not “undocumented”
    -Border fence made the southern border “far more secure…created a significant barrier to illegal immigration”

    https://twitter.com/i/status/1078496926058700800

Comments are closed.