The ruling wasn’t as lopsided as many legal observers expected, but in Trump v. Barbara, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the idea<\/a> that a president can override the 14th Amendment to the Constitution with an executive order. Although the 5-4 ruling left in place a status quo that had existed for generations, much of the right did not respond well to the news.<\/p>\n

Much of the outrage from conservatives was tiresome and predictable, but one element of the pushback to the high court’s ruling stood out, for unfortunate reasons.<\/p>\n

A couple of hours after the decision was issued, Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado argued by way of social media<\/a> that the State Department “should immediately cease to give out visas to pregnant applicants.” Soon after, one of her colleagues went a step further by announcing plans for a legislative solution.<\/p>\n

Republican Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee said Tuesday he’s moving forward with plans for legislation that he’s calling the Anchors Away Act, which would ban certain pregnant foreign women from entering the United States.<\/p>\n

“So, I have a bill; it will be called ‘Anchors Away,’ which, look, if you’re not a U.S. citizen, if you’re not a green card holder and you have a child on U.S. soil, today, that child will be a U.S. citizen,” Ogles said in a video<\/a> posted to social media. “Under my bill, under my legislation, we fix that. … So in short, what this bill does is, if you are a pregnant woman, you can’t come into this country. You got to be a citizen, be here, you have to be a green card holder. So if you’re pregnant and you don’t have one of those statuses, no admittance allowed,” he continued.<\/p>\n

As HuffPost noted<\/a>“The ‘anchor’ part of Ogles’ bill refers to the pejorative term, ‘anchor babies,’ used by many conservatives to describe children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants.”<\/p>\n

The Tennessee Republican also took his pitch to Fox News. “Look, if you’re pregnant and you’re from a foreign nation, you know what?” Coal says<\/a>. “It’s time for Congress to pass a law saying you can’t come here.”<\/p>\n

And while Ogles and Boebert aren’t exactly known for their legislative prowess, even if the House were to pass such a measure, it would never clear the 60-vote threshold in the Senate.<\/p>\n

As the day progressed, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller also appeared on Fox News, and when asked whether the U.S. is prepared to start “banning pregnant women,” Miller didn’t say no, replying instead that there are “a lot of things” the Trump administration will take “a hard look” at.<\/p>\n

On Wednesday morning, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin also said<\/a> the administration is prepared to “look at” restrictions on pregnant travelers to the U.S.<\/p>\n

I won’t pretend to know what, if anything, will come of this, but I do have a question for proponents of these restrictions: How exactly would U.S. officials go about determining whether someone entering the country is pregnant?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

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.”<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Read More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"