The Fourteenth Amendment reads, “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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Until recently, the interpretation of this amendment was virtually undisputed. However, in the week leading up to the midterm elections, President Trump announced a plan to end birthright citizenship through an executive order. This news sparked debate as to whether the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” piece of the amendment applied to those who came to America illegally and then had children.

Shira Ben-Anat ’21 was born in the U.S. while both her parents were born in Israel, making her a natural-born citizen. If Trump’s plan is implemented, children born in the U.S to non-citizen parents would not be born citizens.

Ben-Anat’s initial reaction to the news of Trump’s supposed plans was doubt. “It’s called ‘The Great American Melting Pot’ for a reason,” she said. “If Trump revoked birthright citizenship then people wouldn’t be able to vote for their rights.”

Students who would be directly affected by Trump’s proposal aren’t the only ones thinking about his plan. Sarah Valiante ’21 has thought a lot about what this would mean for America, stating that “This is upsetting and disgraceful to what America stands for and how our ideals are represented to other countries.”

While many politicians, law experts, and constitutional interpreters agree that it would be unconstitutional to carry out such an executive order, there are still those who argue that the Supreme Court has never directly ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly gives birthright citizenship to anyone born on U.S soil. Therefore, they make the argument that Trump’s plan could be executed legally.

Despite both arguments, it remains unlikely that Trump will succeed in revoking birthright citizenship. For one, it is unclear whether his statements were nothing more than a ploy intended to stir up controversy before the midterms. In addition, it is extremely difficult to amend the constitution.

Many students simply feel disappointed by the ongoing attacks on immigrants. Samia Kalpona ’21, who immigrated to the U.S at the age of one and is now a citizen, was shocked that “the President, someone who is supposed to make us feel welcomed, would do something like that.”

Valiante agrees with Kalpona’s feeling of disrespect and anger, saying that “My mom’s an immigrant, so seeing him treat people like her in this way, seeing him trying to discredit [immigrants] like this, is upsetting.”

It can become easy to brush off the President’s constant threats towards immigrants for those who come from a long line of American citizens. However, for those who have greatly benefited from birthright citizenship, the consistent prejudice against immigrants spread by the government causes a growing feeling of neglect and discrimination. “I can’t feel represented by my president if he doesn’t want me to be a citizen,” Shira reflected. “I belong in this country just as much as anyone else, and he doesn’t want to represent me.”

This piece also appears in our November 2018 print edition.