The Dictatorship

There’s a simple reason Trump cannot simply erase birthright citizenship

Published

1 year ago

January 22, 2025

There’s a simple reason Trump cannot simply erase birthright citizenship

On his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that purportedly would end what is known as birthright citizenshipthe concept that anyone born in the United States is a U.S. citizen. That right is enshrined in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

Just as a president does not have the authority to establish a national religion, or stay in office for a third term, the president does not have the authority to erase protections set forth in an amendment to the Constitution. To claim such authority is cynical at best, a sop to nativist elements on the right that should not survive legal challenge. But, in the meantime, millions of lives could be thrown into disarray with the president’s stroke of the pen, and perhaps that’s the point.

The notion of birthright citizenship was established as a principle of law in England in the 1600s and was enshrined in the U.S.’ “Second Founding,” the passage of the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution in the wake of the Civil War.

The president does not have the authority to erase protections set forth in an amendment to the Constitution.

The 14th Amendment, which guarantees to anyone born within the United States the rights and protections of citizenship, was a direct response to the Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott decision of 1857. That decision became one of the many sparks that contributed to the Civil War. There, the court not only found unconstitutional any efforts by Congress to “compromise” around the spread of slavery to new U.S. territories and states; it also determined that enslaved persons, even ones who had resided in areas that prohibited slavery, did not enjoy the rights of citizens. The decision helped galvanize and harden public opinion around slavery, both among those who opposed it and those who supported it and wanted it to operate unfettered by federal law.

After the end of the war and during Reconstruction, Congress passed these amendments with the explicit purpose of ending slavery and involuntary servitude in all their forms. The 14th Amendment’s opening text provides 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.” Because of that language, the president cannot, with the stroke of a pen, rewrite the Constitution.

Nor can Congress. Indeed, roughly 30 years after passage of the 14th Amendment, Congress attempted to exclude from its protections individuals born in the U.S. who were the children of Chinese parents. But the Supreme Court, in United States v. Wong Kim Arkfound that any person born within the United States was entitled to benefit from the citizenship provisions of the 14th Amendment. The plain language of the amendment made that clear and the court endorsed that obvious position.

So what would it really take to rewrite the 14th Amendment? Well, another amendment, which would require not just a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress in favor of repeal of the 14th Amendment, but also ratification by three quarters of the states. Such events are highly unlikely. The Constitution is hard to amend, as it should be. And the notion that the president can sidestep that process is simply preposterous.

Now, that likely will not stop the president and those who wish to see the end of birthright citizenship as enshrined in the Constitution from trying. Indeed, it was a pillar of the Project 2025 playbook. That does not change the fact that the Constitution protects this path to citizenship and only an amendment to the Constitution can change it.

But that does not mean that the president’s effort to try to rewrite the Constitution with the stroke of a pen will not disrupt lives in the meantime. The cruelty of such a cynical move may be exactly what those who wish to end birthright citizenship wish to achieve.

The lives of real people will not be upended, and all for a cynical, cruel and unconstitutional joyride. But that may be the point.

Certainly, such a step would be met promptly by lawsuits challenging the action. In fact, a collection of 18 state attorneys general and some cities have already filed a suit against the order. Perhaps some judge, somewhere, will consider such an action permissible and refuse to prevent it from going into effect. Would it only prevent citizenship from being conferred on those born on U.S. soil in the future as the order purports to do? Could a judicial ruling approving the order invite the administration to seek to strip current citizens of their status?

But the Supreme Court — even this conservative court — will be hard-pressed to engage in down-is-up, up-is-down, Alice-in-Wonderland thinking: that the explicit words of the Constitution, as interpreted consistently for roughly a century-and-a-half, do not mean what they say.

Nevertheless, the president is seeking to end birthright citizenship; such action should be deemed contrary to the plain text of the Constitution. At the same time, lower court endorsement of the position might embolden even more aggressive steps by the administration, even if the Supreme Court should ultimately say the order is unconstitutional, which it should. That does not mean that, in the interim, the lives of real people will not be upended, and all for a cynical, cruel and unconstitutional joyride. But that may be the point.

Ray Brescia

Ray Brescia is a Professor of Law at Albany Law School and author of the forthcoming book, “The Private Is Political: Identity and Democracy in the Age of Surveillance Capitalism.”

The Dictatorship

Michelle Obama’s womanhood isn’t a question. Josh Hokit’s idea of manhood is.

Published

11 hours ago

June 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Jun. 15, 2026, 9:08 PM EDT

President Donald Trump celebrating his 80th birthday with UFC fights on the White House lawn was classless enough. Then Josh Hokit was given a microphone. After the UFC fighter won his cage match at Trump’s flamboyant celebration Sunday night, Hokit, who spoke mostly in disturbingly trite rhymes after his win, managed to further degrade the event. At the conclusion of his post-fight interview with announcer, podcaster and manosphere extraordinaire Joe Rogan, the athlete declared,“Michelle Obama is a man. Am I right, America?”

Many in the crowd of thousands of UFC fans ate it up, and expecting anything less would require an exceptional level of delusion. Misogynoir and transphobia have been lobbed against Obama at least since 2008, when America elected her husband, Barack Obama, president.

Misogynoir and transphobia have been lobbed against Obama at least since 2008, when America elected her husband, Barack Obama, president.

Misogynoir was coined by academic Moya Bailey in 2008 to describe the intertwining of racism and misogyny that targets Black women. As pervasive as it is, it took 15 yearsfor Merriam-Webster to add the word to its dictionary. Even in writing this piece, each time I’ve typed the term, spell-check suggests I have made a typo.

While it’s tempting to categorize Hokit’s remark as random, it was fully on brand for the athlete. ESPN reported, “In his post-fight interview at UFC 324 in January, Hokit called WNBA star Brittney Griner ‘a man.’”

He’s the poster child for misogynoir.

But his statement was also characteristic of the machismo that drove the event itself. Trump’s entire political persona is crafted in the mold of a strongmanan archetype that couldn’t exist without toxic masculinity. And when he was elected to the presidency a second time, Trump brought back to the forefront an erroneous vision of manhood. Hokit, and a lamentable number of other public figures, have since been empowered to espouse misogyny and preach the shallow gospel of toxic masculinity.

But showmanship repressed emotionality and a desperate adherence to benighted notions of manhood alone don’t suffice. Toxic masculinity also requires an allegiance to the desirability politics that are often informed by white supremacy. And Hokit gave it a shoutout Sunday night.

If toxic masculinity is a declaration of what we are expected to perceive as a quintessential depiction of manhood, then completing that picture requires a similar declaration about what we are expected to perceive as a quintessential depiction of womanhood. As has historically been the case, the beauty of Black women, as a whole, doesn’t align with mainstream ideals of attractiveness. So a Trump supporter’s recycling of a racist trope about the first Black first lady being a man was a natural offshoot of Sunday’s glorification of problematic masculinity.

Obama addressed misogynoir-laden and transphobic insults, among others, that she has faced over the years in her 2018 book “Becoming.” She writes, “I’ve smiled for photos with people who call my husband horrible names on national television, but still want a framed keepsake for their mantel. I’ve heard about the swampy parts of the internet that question everything about me, right down to whether I’m a woman or a man. A sitting U.S. congressman has made fun of my butt. I’ve been hurt. I’ve been furious. But mostly, I’ve tried to laugh this stuff off.”

I’ve been furious. But mostly, I’ve tried to laugh this stuff off.

michelle obama in her book “becoming”

Hokit thumping his chest after a violent brawl per the request of a strongman-in-chief, then deriding a high-profile Black female figure as masculine and thus, unappealing, was a true full-circle moment for the manosphere. Notice that Hokit didn’t do a full stop after he insulted Obama. He asked, “Am I right, America?”

At least that part made actual sense — Hokit’s instinct to seek validation is yet another manifestation of toxic masculinity. His question offered a boisterous representation of the need for male approval that exists in the manosphere and the willingness of problematic men to give one another an outsized influence on their behavior. It wasn’t enough for Hokit to disparage a prominent Black woman. He wanted someone to say, “Well done.”

As for his question, the answer is “no.” Hokit was the farthest from “right” as one gets. But the derision of Obama surely scored him brownie points in the manosphere. What better way to secure a nod of respect from the community than to denigrate, arguably, the most high-profile Black woman in the United States while at an event teeming with hypermasculinity?

But neither Obama nor any other woman, Black or otherwise, should have to bear the burden of men insulting them in a desperate quest to secure approbation from other men.

Hokit appears to be developing a habit of ascribing masculinity to Black women. He would be better served by questioning why his idea of manhood includes belittling women for applause.

Zahara Hill is a coordinating producer for MS NOW. She previously worked as a front page editor for HuffPost and the deputy editor for Blavity News.

The Dictatorship

What I witnessed at Delaney Hall should concern every American

Published

11 hours ago

June 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Jun. 15, 2026, 8:20 PM EDT

President Donald Trump, with the support of Republicans in Congress, signed legislation last week funding federal immigration agencies through the end of his term. Americans should know how millions of their taxpayer dollars are being spent on the active destruction of their fellow human beings.

As part of my constitutional oversight responsibilities in Congress, I have visited Delaney Halla privately run detention facility in Newark, New Jersey, four times. From the first time I stepped into Delaney Hall, my worst fears were confirmed.

The smell of sewage permeated the building. The air felt stagnant, and I questioned whether there was adequate ventilation for detainees or staff.

What I witnessed with my own eyes was alarming enough. The smell of sewage permeated the building. The air felt stagnant, and I questioned whether there was adequate ventilation for detainees or staff. In the cafeteria, I saw a space that appeared far too small to accommodate the number of people being held. When I asked how hundreds of detainees were fed, I was told meals were served in waves beginning as early as 4 a.m.

Detainees described freezing temperatures, poor sanitation, spoiled food, isolation and being required to clean bathrooms and showers contaminated with urine and other biological waste without proper protective materials.

The most alarming thing I have witnessed, however, is the treatment — really, the lack of treatment — of people with serious and chronic medical conditions. I believe what I have witnessed at both Delaney Hall and the Elizabeth Detention Center amounts to nothing short of medical abuse.

While the Department of Homeland Security leadership may try to wave away accusations of inhumane treatment, they cannot wave away the effect of their medical negligence — nor should they be allowed to. Every time I have visited both the Delaney and Elizabeth detention centers, I encountered detainees whose health was deteriorating because of the actions overseen by DHS employees and contractors. Individuals with chronic health conditions were not monitored, critical medications are given sporadically or not at all and there is little to no continuity of care for the medically vulnerable.

Individuals with chronic health conditions were not monitored, critical medications are given sporadically or not at all, and there is little to no continuity of care for the medically vulnerable.

One woman detained with diabetes told me she was receiving only a fraction of the medication prescribed by her doctor. When I questioned medical staff, they confirmed her dosage had been reduced shortly after she entered detention without first contacting her pharmacy or physician. They also confirmed blood sugar readings consistent with poorly controlled diabetes.

I spoke with a man who suffered ongoing headaches and hearing loss after striking his head in a fall. He told me he feared seeking additional medical care because he had been warned he could be placed in isolation if sent to the hospital. When I raised the issue with facility leadership, they confirmed isolation was their policy.

Other detainees have described to me equally disturbing experiences, including a woman who said she suffered a miscarriage while in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody after being denied proper medical care when symptoms first appeared. Another pregnant woman told me she feared for the health of her unborn child because she could not obtain the specialized care her condition requires.

These were not isolated complaints. And together, they paint a picture of a detention system failing to provide adequate medical care to the people in its custody.

The Department of Homeland Security insists healthcare is available inside Delaney Hall. What I witnessed firsthand tells a different story. Detainees may have access to care, but they are not receiving the care that their conditions, diagnoses, doctors or even our own good conscience would warrant.

When I questioned Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin about whether ICE tracks detainees with chronic illnesses such as diabetes, cancer and heart disease, whether those conditions are regularly monitored and whether independent health officials are allowed to inspect the facility, I did not receive answers. That lack of accountability should concern every American.

The consequences of these failures could be deadly. Severe hypoglycemia can become life-threatening within hours. Heart conditions can rapidly worsen without medication. Untreated infections can become medical emergencies, and the disruption of medication can have life-threatening consequences in the short and long run.

What makes this even more troubling is who is being detained.

Despite the administration’s rhetoric about targeting dangerous criminals, the people I met at Delaney Hall were overwhelmingly low-risk individuals being held for civil immigration violations, not criminal offenses. Some said they had legal status until this administration stripped it away. Others described being picked up off the street, or where they work, or at laundromats, schools and even outside courthouses or routine immigration appointments.

We cannot turn a blind eye to the conditions inside these facilities. Nor can we ignore the role of corporations such as the GEO Group, the company with an estimated $1 billion contract to operate Delaney Hall. Taxpayer dollars are being used to inflict profound human suffering, all too often condoned because those detained are viewed as “other.” To make matters worse, the $70 billion that Congress recently approved for ICE and Customs and Border Protection is in addition to $191 billion previously allocated to DHS with a party-line vote.

The least my Republican colleagues can do now is demand answers about what is happening inside facilities like Delaney Hall and hear firsthand from detainees about what they are experiencing. If they truly listen, they will be moved to action. I know I was.

Because the people I met at Delaney Hall are mothers, fathers, workers and neighbors. They are human beings. They deserve dignity, medical care and due process.

No matter where someone was born or what their immigration status may be, their humanity does not disappear when they enter a detention facility.

The measure of any nation is how it treats the people in its custody. By that standard, what is happening at Delaney Hall is a moral failure that extends far beyond its walls.

And when we allow due process, equal protection under the law and basic human rights to be denied to some, we weaken those protections for everyone. The Constitution is only as strong as our willingness to defend it. We must seek to protect it, starting by closing Delaney Hall.

Analilia Mejia, a Democrat, represents New Jersey’s 11th Congressional District in the U.S. House.

The Dictatorship

Monday’s Mini-Report, 6.15.26

Published

11 hours ago

June 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* Russia’s latest deadly attack in Ukraine: “A large-scale Russian attack on Ukraine killed five rescuers in Kharkiv and wounded at least 20 people in the capital Kyiv on Monday as strikes set apartment buildings ablaze and sparked a fire at one of the country’s most significant religious landmarks. The rescuers were killed in Kharkiv by a second Russian strike as they fought a blaze caused by an earlier attack, Interior Minister Ihor Klymenko said. At least five other emergency workers were wounded.”

* From late last week: “A joint strike by the United States and Venezuela killed a leader of the Tren de Aragua transnational gang, President Trump and officials in both countries said on Friday, dealing a blow to a syndicate the Trump administration has blamed for an influx of violent crime and illicit drugs.”

* The right way to do it: “Hungarian lawmakers on Monday passed a constitutional amendment that would ban Viktor Orbán from returning to power. The amendment, approved by 135 votes in favor and 50 against, would limit prime ministers to just eight years in office if it becomes law. The amendment is written to apply retroactively, meaning that Viktor Orbán could not return as Hungary’s prime minister. Orbán served as prime minister for a total of 20 years.”

* A case we have been keeping an eye on: “A federal judge ordered the Trump administration on Friday to reinstall ‌exhibits and signs on topics like slavery and climate change that it had removed from parks and monuments nationwide because they ‘do not align with its preferred narrative.’”

* Trump’s Department of Justice does what Trump wants: “The Justice Department’s Antitrust Division has signed off on Paramount Skydance’s $111 billion bid for Warner Bros. Discovery. The approval, first reported by Blue Light News, clears a major regulatory hurdle for a deal that has become one of the most closely watched media merger reviews of the Trump era.”

* Failing to make America healthy again: “A relentless measles outbreak in Utah has been spreading for nearly a year, putting the U.S. on a path to losing the measles-elimination status it earned more than two decades ago. Fueling the nearly 12-month outbreak: more parents opting not to vaccinate their children for school; infections hitting communities statewide; and lenient public-health policies on quarantining exposed students.”

* McConnell’s health issues persist: “Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, was hospitalized on Sunday, according to his spokesperson, who provided no details on the former Senate majority leader’s condition.”

See you tomorrow.

Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”