TIRCC Slams Unconstitutional Birthright Executive Order
On June 19, 2023, the Telecom Infra Project (TIRCC) released a statement denouncing the Biden Administration's recent executive order on birthright citizenship. The order, which would extend automatic citizenship to the children of all non-citizens born in the United States, has sparked controversy and raised questions about its constitutionality.
TIRCC, a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting open and affordable telecommunications infrastructure, argues that the executive order is unconstitutional because it violates the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This clause states that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." TIRCC contends that the executive order exceeds the President's authority by granting citizenship to children who are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, such as those born to foreign diplomats or military personnel.
Additionally, TIRCC raises concerns about the potential impact of the executive order on national security and immigration policy. The organization argues that extending automatic citizenship to non-citizens could make it more difficult to track and apprehend illegal immigrants and could create a security risk if foreign governments exploit the order to send their citizens to the United States in order to claim citizenship for their children.
The Biden Administration has defended the executive order, arguing that it is a necessary step to address the issue of undocumented children in the United States. The order would provide a path to citizenship for millions of undocumented children, many of whom have lived in the United States for their entire lives and consider themselves American.
Advocacy groups for immigrants' rights have also praised the executive order, calling it a "vital step" towards creating a more just and equitable immigration system. They argue that the order will provide undocumented children with the opportunity to achieve their full potential and contribute to American society.
However, not everyone agrees with TIRCC's assessment of the executive order. Some legal scholars argue that the order is constitutional, citing the Supreme Court's ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), which held that all persons born in the United States, regardless of their parents' citizenship status, are automatically citizens. Others argue that the order is politically motivated and will lead to increased illegal immigration.
The debate over the constitutionality of the birthright executive order is complex and involves multiple perspectives. TIRCC's argument that the order is unconstitutional is based on a narrow interpretation of the Citizenship Clause. However, other legal scholars believe that the order is constitutional based on Supreme Court precedent.
The potential impact of the executive order on national security and immigration policy is also uncertain. While some raise concerns about security risks and increased illegal immigration, others argue that the order will provide undocumented children with a path to citizenship and reduce the risk of family separation.
Ultimately, the constitutionality of the executive order will likely be decided by the courts. However, the debate over the order is likely to continue regardless of the outcome, as it raises important questions about citizenship, immigration, and the role of the government in regulating both.
TIRCC's criticism of the birthright executive order highlights the complexities of the issue of birthright citizenship. The order has both supporters and detractors, and its constitutionality is likely to be tested in court. The broader implications of the order, both for the United States and for the international community, remain to be seen.