Paul Ryan Slams the Brakes: Trump Can't Change Birthright Citizenship Without Congres

Paul Ryan Slams the Brakes: Trump Can't Change Birthright Citizenship Without Congress


October 30, 2018

Katie Pavlich


https://media.townhall.com/townhall/...df2168e5c9.jpg


House Speaker Paul Ryan, who is retiring at the end of the year, is pouring cold water on President Trump's plans to end birthright citizenship through an executive order.



“You cannot end birthright citizenship with an executive order," Ryan told a Kentucky radio station Tuesday. "As a conservative, I’m a believer in following the plain text of the Constitution, and I think in this case the 14th Amendment is pretty clear, and that would involve a very, very lengthy constitutional process.

But where we obviously totally agree with the president is getting at the root issue here, which is unchecked illegal immigration.”



President Trump said during an interview with Axios Monday night that he was prepared to end birth right citizenship, which applies to anyone born on American soil, without Congress or a change to the U.S. Constitution.


"How ridiculous, we're the only country in the world where a person comes in, has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United States for 85 years with all of those benefits,” Trump said.






Meanwhile, on the Senate side of Capitol Hill President Trump is seeing support on the issue from Republican Senator Lindsey Graham.

Finally, a president willing to take on this absurd policy of birthright citizenship. https://t.co/kCa0ko7P76
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) October 30, 2018

The United States is one of two developed countries in the world who grant citizenship based on location of birth.

This policy is a magnet for illegal immigration, out of the mainstream of the developed world, and needs to come to an end.
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) October 30, 2018

The United States is one of two developed countries in the world who grant citizenship based on location of birth.

This policy is a magnet for illegal immigration, out of the mainstream of the developed world, and needs to come to an end.
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) October 30, 2018

In addition, I plan to introduce legislation along the same lines as the proposed executive order from President @realDonaldTrump.
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) October 30, 2018




https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...gress-n2533374

Speaker Paul Ryan: “you cannot end birthright citizenship with an executive order.”…


October 30, 2018 by sundance


A few months ago, when discussing overall immigration policy, I wrote: “There is no greater disconnect from ordinary Americans -on any singular issue- than the policy positions of Democrats and Republicans in Washington DC surrounding immigration. President Donald Trump is confronting their unified interests.” The reaction from Speaker of the House Paul Ryan is directly related to this truism:



https://theconservativetreehouse.fil...pg?w=640&h=455

(Via Associated Press) […] The top Republican tells WVLK radio in Kentucky, “Well you obviously cannot do that. You cannot end birthright citizenship with an executive order.”

Ryan’s comments Tuesday offered a rare challenge to the president — from his own party. […] Ryan says Republicans didn’t like when then-President Barack Obama “tried changing immigration laws via executive action. He says “obviously as conservatives we believe in the Constitution.”

Ryan is retiring but the No. 3 House Republican, Louisiana’s Rep. Steve Scalise, said on Fox that he’s glad Trump is considering options. (read more)

It does not go unnoticed that Speaker Ryan never challenged DACA.



It does not go unnoticed that Paul Ryan fully supported the June 2014 house vote for the Senate Gang-of-Eight immigration bill; until Majority Leader Eric Cantor was primaried 48 hours before the vote.



The issue of lax immigration, and the subsequent lack of enforcement, is the cornerstone for the UniParty in Washington DC. It is one of the central elements that isolates the professional political class from the majority of common sense Americans.



For the Democrats, support for open-borders and lax immigration enforcement is part of their overall ideology and fabian world-view. For traditional republicans support for lax immigration, which allows exploitation of labor, is driven by the Wall Street views of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (President Tom Donohue), and various elements associated with multinational corporate interests (Koch Brothers).



No amount of external political pressure upon DC will change this dynamic.



The only thing that will fracture this entrenched DC ideology is a long-process to dismantle the system that enables mutually beneficial arrangement.



A few perspective examples:



Senator Lindsey Lindsey Graham will likely support Trump’s initiative to end the anchor baby process, or birthright citizenship. However, tread cautiously, because Graham looks at this issue as a foot-in-door opportunity to force comprehensive immigration reform. There’s nothing altruistic within the “comprehensive.”



McCain dies; Martha McSally has the same view funded by the same benefactor. Corker resigns; Mitt Romney has the same view funded by the same benefactor. Paul Ryan exits; Kevin McCarthy has the same view funded by the same benefactor. See the problem?



If President Trump, on our behalf, is going to defeat the “Big Club” on the issues around immigration he will need two essential elements:



♦First, President Trump will need the unwavering support of common sense middle-America. When I say ‘unwavering’, I mean total and complete support from everyone, anyone, who wants to see immigration law enforced. Every entity who supports left-wing progressive globalism will spare no expense in attacking him. The entire planet will align against him. If you think things are bad now… oh man, we haven’t seen anything yet.


♦Second, POTUS will need to take the same strategic approach deployed in the trade and financial confrontation to new levels of strategy. President Trump will need to replace everyone within the administration that is ‘Big Club’-sketchy; with extreme prejudice. The attacks will come from all directions. Having to deal with a weaponized intelligence apparatus, a duplicitous cabinet, and a complicit DOJ and FBI will make any immigration enforcement/reform effort almost impossible. Right now, on the issue of immigration, many within the Trump cabinet are allied with the Donohue/Koch ‘Big Club’.


Suffice to say if the Republicans do not gain seats in the Senate and hold the House of Representatives it won’t even be worth starting.


https://theconservativetreehouse.fil...pg?w=640&h=485



https://theconservativetreehouse.com...ecutive-order/

Paul Ryan...YOU are history in 2 months!

They are NOT U.S. citizens and they never were!

You swamp rats have allowed this SCAM to go on for decades!

begone simpleton; wouldn't do anything to protect America or its citizens since you have been in office; worthless politicians deserved to be thrown out of congress, not leave with a pension for life

Yes, RyanBeGone and it won't be soon enough. Nothing like going out in flames. Wow, what an idiot, comparing Obama's DACA (WRONG) to Trump's ending birthright citizenship (RIGHT).

Related:


Levin: Paul Ryan was dead wrong on birthright citizenship

https://www.alipac.us/f9/levin-paul-...2s-how-365580/

I believe a constitutional amendment would be next to impossible to pass at this time. That's why I fully support Trump signing the executive order. The executive order would most certainly create lawsuits that would eventually end up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Quote:

---

Constitutional Amendment Process

The authority to amend the Constitution of the United States is derived from Article V of the Constitution. After Congress proposes an amendment, the Archivist of the United States, who heads the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), is charged with responsibility for administering the ratification process under the provisions of 1 U.S.C. 106b. The Archivist has delegated many of the ministerial duties associated with this function to the Director of the Federal Register. Neither Article V of the Constitution nor section 106b describe the ratification process in detail. The Archivist and the Director of the Federal Register follow procedures and customs established by the Secretary of State, who performed these duties until 1950, and the Administrator of General Services, who served in this capacity until NARA assumed responsibility as an independent agency in 1985.

The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. None of the 27 amendments to the Constitution have been proposed by constitutional convention. The Congress proposes an amendment in the form of a joint resolution. Since the President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process, the joint resolution does not go to the White House for signature or approval. The original document is forwarded directly to NARA's Office of the Federal Register (OFR) for processing and publication. The OFR adds legislative history notes to the joint resolution and publishes it in slip law format. The OFR also assembles an information package for the States which includes formal "red-line" copies of the joint resolution, copies of the joint resolution in slip law format, and the statutory procedure for ratification under 1 U.S.C. 106b.
The Archivist submits the proposed amendment to the States for their consideration by sending a letter of notification to each Governor along with the informational material prepared by the OFR. The Governors then formally submit the amendment to their State legislatures or the state calls for a convention, depending on what Congress has specified. In the past, some State legislatures have not waited to receive official notice before taking action on a proposed amendment. When a State ratifies a proposed amendment, it sends the Archivist an original or certified copy of the State action, which is immediately conveyed to the Director of the Federal Register. The OFR examines ratification documents for facial legal sufficiency and an authenticating signature. If the documents are found to be in good order, the Director acknowledges receipt and maintains custody of them. The OFR retains these documents until an amendment is adopted or fails, and then transfers the records to the National Archives for preservation.
A proposed amendment becomes part of the Constitution as soon as it is ratified by three-fourths of the States (38 of 50 States). When the OFR verifies that it has received the required number of authenticated ratification documents, it drafts a formal proclamation for the Archivist to certify that the amendment is valid and has become part of the Constitution. This certification is published in the Federal Register and U.S. Statutes at Large and serves as official notice to the Congress and to the Nation that the amendment process has been completed.

In a few instances, States have sent official documents to NARA to record the rejection of an amendment or the rescission of a prior ratification. The Archivist does not make any substantive determinations as to the validity of State ratification actions, but it has been established that the Archivist's certification of the facial legal sufficiency of ratification documents is final and conclusive.

In recent history, the signing of the certification has become a ceremonial function attended by various dignitaries, which may include the President. President Johnson signed the certifications for the 24th and 25th Amendments as a witness, and President Nixon similarly witnessed the certification of the 26th Amendment along with three young scholars. On May 18, 1992, the Archivist performed the duties of the certifying official for the first time to recognize the ratification of the 27th Amendment, and the Director of the Federal Register signed the certification as a witness.

---

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution