Birthright Citizenship: Nigerians In Diaspora Kick, Say It’s Illegal

Nigerians living abroad have criticized President Donald Trump's attempt to revoke birthright citizenship, a right enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, asserting that an executive order by itself cannot alter constitutional provisions.

They argued that in the end, it would be up to the US courts and the Supreme Court to decide on the legality or otherwise of Trump’s move.

President Trump had signed an executive order on assumption of office, Monday, seeking to end the age-long citizenship by birth among many other orders that aimed to reverse the President Biden-policy era.

The executive order seeks to stop automatic U.S. citizenship for children born on American soil to parents who are in the country unlawfully or on temporary stay.

The Executive Order states that the federal government will no longer issue documents recognizing U.S. citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country unlawfully or temporarily. The order specifies that it will apply to children born in the U.S. after 30 days from the date of the order.

The order has drawn immediate legal suits with 22 Democratic states and some civil rights groups filing court actions to stop the implementation.

However, reacting to the development, Mr. Ralu Ajekwe, who resides in the USA, said though the move might have been contrived to protect the national interest, the key thing to be considered was the legality of the order.

“Is it in line with extant laws? Is an executive order enough to amend a constitutional issue? One thing I will tell you though is that a government exists to protect the national interest of the state, both in local and international relations.

”This means that it has to take a stand that aligns with its goals, values, and objectives. If Trump has banned citizenship by birth, the questions should be: What are his goals and objectives?; Does it align with the interests and values of the American people?

” Are Americans happy with the policy? Does it lead to the greatest happiness of the greatest numbers?. If all the above is yes, then he is doing the right thing.  Another thing I think we should look at is the legality of the policy,” he stated.

Speaking in the same vein, a diaspora Nigerian and a legal practitioner based in Canada, who declined to be named, dismissed the move, describing it simply as showmanship.

“There are two things with Trump: One is grandstanding or showmanship for his base or supporters and another is what would be legal. There is a limit to executive orders,” he said.

Citing a deviation from the 14th Amendment, he asserted that what Trump was trying to do was to introduce the concept of a parent’s temporary status or lack of permanent residency as qualification for US citizenship.

He stated that the US constitution used the wording: “All persons born… in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”  Can children of temporary residents not be subject to the jurisdiction of the US?

“There is an exception though. The children of people on the diplomatic mission are not usually citizens of the US (and Canada) due to their diplomatic immunity, privileges, conventions and practices.

“I think that executive order will be challenged. It will be up to the US courts or Supreme Court to determine. If the court determines against Trump, those who lost their citizenship while the policy is in force will regain their citizenship.

“Judiciary will have a final say and as such, there is no full details on that immigration policy till the legal challenges are decisively determined by the courts. Anything else would likely be posturing and grandstanding.

“Now, as to the illegal migrants or undocumented migrants, which is also mentioned in the order, the constitution did not say their children can not be citizens. The overarching phrase: All persons born may work in their favour as well.

“Come to think of it, most of the undocumented migrants are trying hard to be subject to the jurisdiction of the US through their action to or inaction to stay in the US albeit illegally. Most are pleading with the US to grant them a stay.  Can one safely argue that the undocumented migrants are not subject to the jurisdiction? He stated.

Peter Obiora, online editor at InvestAdvocate, who lives in the United States, said: “It cannot work that way except they change the constitution on that. The constitution supersedes any other executive order. So, before that can happen, it has to be changed in the constitution.

“There would be a barrage of lawsuits on this. He touted that idea the first time he came in and it was shot down, this time around, he’s back with it. But there’s no way Trump can stop birthright citizenship except through constitutional amendment.  I don’t see him actualising this until his tenure ends.”

Johnpaul Nwafidelie, who is resident in Canada, explained it was a way to control immigration into the United States.

He explained that Canada was also working on a similar policy action but was going through the parliament.

He advised Nigerians who want dual citizenship for their children to go through the right channel, given the current order in place.

“My point is that Nigerians took advantage of birthright citizenship while it lasted. So, now that it has changed, people should follow the current policy to get it if they so desire.

”It worked good for foreign nationals but is no longer working because it gives citizenship to the wrong people who shouldn’t have been allowed to stay in the country due to crime and terrorism.

“So, it’s a way they want to control the immigrants into the country. Like I always said, no door is shut, it’s just a change in process. So, whoever wants it should be patient enough to go through the right path and still get it,” he said.