Click image to access article.
It’s stronger than you think.
Our Features section hosts clusters of articles on a single theme, and will often include opposing points of view and spawn debate.
This week’s feature is a debate centered around an event moderated by Ryan Williams, President of the Claremont Institute, and hosted by The Heritage Foundation on September 27, 2018. Claremont Institute Senior Fellows Michael Anton and Edward Erler, along with Claremont Review of BooksContributor John Fonte, discussed “The Case Against Birthright Citizenship:
This week, in “Citizenship, Immigration, and the Nation-State,” Ed Erler lays out what he perceives is at stake, replying to “the hysterical arguments made by progressive liberals and others who should know better.”
Meanwhile, our friends Linda Chavez and John Yoo argue against the position of many from Claremont. In “The 14th Amendment’s Promise” Linda Chavez argues birthright citizenship should be an uncontroversial right. John Yoo argues in “Settled Law: Birthright Citizenship and the 14th Amendment” that the 14th Amendment settled the question of birthright citizenship long ago.
Erler replies to Yoo and other critics in “The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment: the Congressional Debate” and, most recently, “Birthright Questions, Founding Answers.”
In “It’s the Citizenship, Stupid,” James Poulos explores the hollow contemporary notion of citizenship, and why it is increasingly questionable.
Only Congress could make something so simple and weaponize it into a hole that no one can crawl out of. On a side note: How can Indians who were here long before the Whiteman not be also claims citizens? Today people hold dual citizenship even in Congress and alleged past Presidents.