Ending a right: Challenging birthright citizenship won't end well for US

If Mr Trump indeed succeeds in rolling back birthright citizenship then it will stand as an epochal shift in American identity and in its role in the world

In countries that have inherited the liberal common-law tradition from England, all those born in their territory are granted citizenship. This is the case in what is now the United Kingdom, but also in India, much of the Commonwealth — and the United States (US). That is why it was a major shock when, as one of his first acts, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order banning “birthright citizenship” in the US. This order subsequently received multiple legal challenges; but now, the right wing-dominated US Supreme Court has said that none of those challenges can amount to a nationwide overturning of Mr Trump’s order. In short, some states might recognise birthright citizenship and others might not. Within 30 days, the administration might be able to start restricting birthright citizenship across large parts of the country. It is often said of right-wing populists that they want to take their countries back to a previous period; in the case of this order, the intent is to take the US back to the 19th century, before it became customary for anyone born on US soil to be granted legal citizenship in that country. 

 

In 1898, the Supreme Court pronounced on the case of Wong Kim Ark, who was born to Chinese parents in California in the 1870s. The US authorities wanted to deport him as a non-citizen; but the judges stated that, as he was born in the country, he possessed all the rights and privileges of a citizen. This has been the law of that land since that period, and it has allowed the US to become a successful multiethnic society in the period since then. Of course, that is also what enrages some of Mr Trump’s followers. There have been concerns, for example, that some people choose to come to the US shortly before giving birth to ensure citizenship for their child; or that the children of undocumented migrants achieve citizenship, and that serves as a constraint on deporting their parents. But it is not simply the possible misuse of this right that is the problem as far as the American nativist movement is concerned; it is the fact that it means that anyone, not just those of a particular race or descent, can be American. 

If Mr Trump indeed succeeds in rolling back birthright citizenship — which will face multiple further legal challenges, of which he has so far only partially won one — then it will stand as an epochal shift in American identity and in its role in the world. It has long been one of the most attractive parts about the US that it can absorb individuals from any background or culture, and give them the same rights and opportunities as those of more local descent. This has served the country well. It has ensured that it remains in the forefront of science, technology, and innovation; and that it houses the greatest concentration of financial power and business acumen in the world. Most predictions of economic and national power over the coming century, for example, keep the US ahead of China precisely because one absorbs outsiders and the other does not. All nations in the world have a stake in the US’ success because their populations have cousins who have become American. The US is not prepared for what a shift in this dynamic will do to its global leadership.