The Fight Over Birthright Citizenship

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Good morning, Cooner country. Okay, my friends, look, this is
the heart and soul of Donald Trump's attempt to not
just secure the border, but to ultimately end the invasion
of our country by a relentless, unlimited wave of illegal immigration.

(00:23):
And that is the executive order. He signed many executive orders,
as you know, putting what oney, five hundred troops now
on our southern border, declaring a national emergency on our
southern border, reinstituting remain in Mexico, which was immensely effective
under his first term, that is now back ending catch

(00:44):
and release. They are now, by the way, beginning mass deportations.
Boston was the area of a major raid by Ice.
I'm going to get to that a little bit later.
But it's not just Boston now. They're happening in Chicago,
in New York, in Atlanta, in Los Angeles, in Dallas,

(01:05):
in Houston. It is now happening all across the country.
Criminal illegal aliens by the hundreds and hundreds and soon
by the thousands and thousands are going to be deported.
Already some are being deported, many more are on the way.
So as I talk to you now, Donald Trump, already,

(01:29):
just to show you the blistering pace that he has
now set this blitz of executive orders. Remember under FDR,
he set the benchmark of the first hundred days. People
now are talking about Trump establishing a new benchmark, an

(01:50):
incredible warp speed benchmark of one hundred hours. That's how
much he's done in the first four days of his
press presidency since he was inaugurated on Monday, sworn into
office at the heart and soul of his executive orders.
To show you how serious he is about ending this

(02:13):
onslaught and invasion of illegal immigration that has plagued our
country now for over forty to fifty years, he signed
an executive order ending what's called birthright citizenship or more
popularly known as anchor babies. And that is the policy that,

(02:37):
by the way, has just been informally accepted. Hey, people
just assume that they read the fourteenth Amendment. This is
what it's based on. That if you happen to be
in the United States, even if you come here illegally,
even if you're just here on a tourist visa, you're

(02:58):
here for a vacation for one week and PLoP outcomes
a baby, that this baby is automatically conferred instant US citizenship.
Donald Trump now says no. He issued an executive order
called returning or Restoring meaning and Value to American Citizenship,

(03:23):
in which his executive order you got to listen to
this now explicitly says that if a woman, I mean,
who is here in this country illegally, so say some
woman from Mexico. I'm just gonna use Mexico as an example,
nine months pregnant, just crawls over the border and has

(03:49):
a baby on American soil. If the father is not
an American citizen or not a lawful permanent resident of
the United States, that baby does not get automatic citizenship.
That baby will be considered a citizen. I'm just using
Mexico as the citizen of Mexico. Furthermore, to stop the wave,

(04:16):
and it is a wave. It's a complete abuse of
our immigration laws and of the so called interpretation or
to me, misinterpretation of the fourteenth Amendment. There is something
called birth tourism that has been running rampant now for decades.
In fact, it's getting worse. This is where people from

(04:38):
all over the world, from China, from Iran, from Saudi Arabia,
from Maderashia, take your pick literally come to the United States.
They even time it nine months pregnant. They come, they
stay at a local hotel. Boom, the baby's about to come.

(05:00):
They go to a hospital, PLoP, outcomes the baby, and
there's an American citizen. And this is being done all
over the country, again and again and again. Donald Trump
now says, even if you're here legally but on a
temporary visa, meaning for example, you're here as a tourist,

(05:20):
you're here just on a vacation, a tourist visa. You
got permission to be here for a week or two. No,
unless the father is an American citizen or a lawful
permanent resident, the baby will not be conferred automatic citizenship.
That baby is a citizen of China or Saudi Arabia

(05:41):
or Russia or whatever home jurisdiction, home country they come from. Now,
my friends, why is this so critical, Because this practice
of anchor babies of quote unquote birthright citizenship is the
heart and soul of open borders globalism. This is what

(06:05):
the ACLU, what George Sorows, what all of these open borders,
cheap labor lobbies have been telling people from all over
the world, bring your women with you make sure they're
pregnant and have them have the baby on American soil.
This way, the baby is automatically an American citizen. You,

(06:29):
as the parents, will then get to stay because we
don't want to quote unquote separate families. And so the
illegal parents get to stay because their child is now
an American citizen. Plus through the baby, that's where they're
given unlimited welfare, free housing, Section eight, free healthcare, free education, welfare.

(06:59):
As I said, ebt, you name it, across the board.
That's where they get their phones, their iPads. That's what's
literally bankrupting the United States. It is straining our social
services to the breaking point. And so Trump now says,
you really, look, we can protect the border till the

(07:22):
cows come home, and we can deport millions. But if
people still believe that there is something called universal citizenship,
that just by the fact that you come on this
soil and land, no matter how illegally you got here, Shazam,
you have a baby. The babies an American just as

(07:44):
American as Donald Trump, with all the rights say of
the President of the United States, and the parent or
parents get to stay. It's never gonna end. It's literally
never gonna end. It's a suicide pact. And that's one
of my arguments why I say they're completely misreading deliberately

(08:04):
the Fourteenth Amendment. The fourteenth Amendment is not a suicide pact.
The Constitution is not a suicide pact. The moment Trump
issued his executive order, the media went apoplectic is not
the word they know. This is the heart and soul

(08:27):
of their globalist open borders regime. If Trump now can
get a proper definition of the fourteenth Amendment and end
this fallacy, this fantasy, this misinterpretation of the fourteenth Amendment,
then they realize it's over. And so twenty two attorneys

(08:51):
general from blue states plus the city of San Francisco,
plus the ACLU. Now the ACLU goes to court. Notice
they didn't go to court during the lockdowns. They didn't
go to court over the vaccine mandate. They didn't go

(09:12):
to court when they were closing down churches and businesses
and schools and shutting everything down. Then when you needed them,
they were nowhere to be seen but to benefit criminal
illegal foreigners, lawbreakers, people who come into our country illegally

(09:33):
and abuse our generosity. There they are leading the charge baby.
So they immediately sued. It is now the mother of
all lawsuits. It went to a judge in Seattle. The
judge in Seattle, shazam, what did you expect? Said, this

(09:55):
is the most unconstitutional executive order he has ever seen.
Scene He has now temporarily blocked Trump's order for fourteen days,
but he says he wants to make a permanent injunction,
a permanent ban against Trump's order. He wants to strangle
this in the cradle. Listen to Trump's response. He's not

(10:20):
He's not deterred. He said, I want to appeal this
all the way to the Supreme Court. If I have
to roll cut eleven Mike, mister prennent, a US.

Speaker 2 (10:34):
Judge, I rarely blocked the brith Right citizenship order.

Speaker 3 (10:38):
Do you have any reaction?

Speaker 1 (10:39):
Obviously, we'll look the other They put it before a
certain judge in Seattle. I guess right, and there's no
surprises with that judge. I agree with him. I mean,
it was so obvious. So they went judge shopping, they
got the judge that they wanted. Okay, this is a
galactic battle. There's no other way to put it. Donald

(11:01):
Trump now has thrown down the gauntlet. He is not
just stopping Biden's border invasion. God bless him. He's not
just deporting illegals, God bless him. He's not just reinstituting
remain in Mexico, God bless him, and putting troops on
the border and completing the border wall. God bless him.

(11:22):
He's now going to topple or try to topple, the
entire open border's unlimited illegal immigration regime. And that regime
is based on what they claim is the right interpretation
of the fourteenth Amendment. That's where they allow the practice

(11:42):
of anchor babies and birth tourism to take place. I
say it's the misinterpretation. But this is why they keep
This is why now for decade after decade after decade,
they keep allowing illegals to come into our country and
then boom, they have a baby and suddenly that baby's

(12:03):
an automatic American citizen conferred automatic American citizenship. Or they travel,
they go to Florida, the wife or girlfriend or whatever
is nine months pregnant, and they stay at a hospital
and boom out comes the baby. The baby now is
an American citizen. So let me just ask all of

(12:25):
you before we even get to the constitutional issue at heart.
As a matter of policy, do you support what's called
birthright citizenship i e. Commonly know as anchor babies. Should
people who come to our country illegally who have a baby,

(12:47):
should that baby be then conferred all of the privileges
and rights of an American citizen. Should people who just
visit our country, say as Turf or they're here on
a temporary work visa, and outcomes a baby, should they
then should their child then be a citizen? And should

(13:10):
they be allowed to stay as a result. Now, I
say this is insane. Now one of the reasons is
not just that it's happening and it's being abused and
it's inviting the entire world to come to our country.
But as I say to liberals and these neo conservatives

(13:31):
who support this, like the Wall Street Journal editorial page,
name me one other country in the world, literally, just one.
I don't care, first World, second World, third World, European country,
Asian country, Latin American country, Western country, non Western country.

(13:51):
Name me one other country in the world that if
you go to that country illegally and your wife or
girlfriend whatever has a baby, that suddenly you're a citizen
of that country. You won't find one. I'm telling you
you won't find one. Go to France on a vacation,

(14:13):
your wife or girlfriend has a baby, you're not a
French citizen. Go to Norway, you're not Norwegian. Go to Russia,
you're not Russian. I could every country and it doesn't matter.
Go to Canada. No, they don't give birthright citizenship. So
only we in the United States do it. It's madness,

(14:34):
it's insanity. Now, they always use this line from the
fourteenth Amendment. Okay, what they and they'll in fact, let
me read it the way the liberals read it, and
then I'm going to read the actual the actual clause itself.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States are

(14:58):
citizens of the United States and of the state wherein
they reside. Now, this is what the ACLU, for example,
that's when they send their flax, their hacks on the air,
say on CNN or MSNBC or whatever. There are many
Democrats will come out and say, well, fourteenth Amendment is

(15:22):
very clear. All persons born or naturalized in the United
States are citizens of the United States. This is open
it's open and shutcase. No, let me tell you what
it actually says. You're leaving out a very important clause,
and that clause is everything. Please pay attention. Quote all

(15:46):
persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject
to the jurisdiction thereof that's the key clause, are citizens
of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.

(16:07):
And as Trump and his lawyers, and he's got an
army now of constitutional lawyers are saying, that's the key
clause that everyone has been deliberately forgetting or omitting, because
what that clause is going to show is that clearly
the intent of the fourteenth Amendment wasn't just to extend

(16:29):
citizenship to any illegal or any foreigner, or any tourist
or anybody who just happens to have a baby on
American soil. The Fourteenth Amendment, as everybody knows, was created
right after the Civil War to deal with the issue
of the freed slaves who were denied citizenship because they

(16:56):
were black of African descent and were enslaved in the South.
It was never meant for illegal aliens. Okay. President Trump
now seeks to restrict and actually end what's known as
birthright citizenship, commonly known as anchor babies and birth tourism,

(17:17):
and he's already being sued. Twenty two attorneys general, all
Democrats from blue states. Even cities are getting involved, like
San Francisco, and of course the ACLU is leading the charge. Already.
They went judge shopping, and yesterday, yep, the judge barely
literally the ink was barely dry on Trump's executive order,

(17:42):
and boom, the judge has already blocked it. Trump says
he's going to appeal my question to you. This is
now the heart and soul of the matter. Should people
who come into our country illegally or their tourists, should

(18:04):
they be allowed to have their children here and and
the children be conferred with American automatic American citizenship. I say,
it's insane, it's wrong, it's immoral, it's ultimately illegal and unconstitutional.
And I hope the High Court, the Supreme Court, takes

(18:26):
up this executive order and finally rules on this issue
decisively and definitively. But that's me I want to hear
from you. Should illegals who have children in America, should
their children be given automatic citizenship? Six one seven two six,
six sixty eight sixty eight is the number Okay, let's

(18:50):
go to Sean in Kentucky. Thanks for holding Sean, and.

Speaker 2 (18:56):
Welcome morn Jeff. Let's go br.

Speaker 1 (19:02):
Let's go Brandon. Sean. Hey, what do you make of this, Sean?
Are you in favor of what Trump did or are
you against it?

Speaker 3 (19:12):
So?

Speaker 2 (19:12):
I am in favor of it. The only thing that
I have issue with is the fact that they are
leaning on the jurisdiction part, because I know that the
jurisdiction part of the amendment, because I know that there
have been court cases in the past where they've essentially
said that, well, if you're in the United States, you're

(19:34):
subject to the United States laws, so therefore you're under
the jurisdiction. That's been the left argument, but there seems
to be from both sides, and ignoring of the reside portion. So,
I mean, most people would commonly think that reside means
you've lived somewhere, So when it comes to anchor babies

(19:55):
or birth tourism, you're just here. You're not actually reside here,
You're not living here. I could see why the fourteenth
Amendment could be an argument for say the Dreamers, because
their situation or circumstance is quite similar to why it
was even created in the first place, which was to
protect the African American slaves that were freed and had

(20:16):
lived here their whole lives and likely for multiple generations.
But it is specific that you need to have already
resided here in the United States in order to be
a citizen.

Speaker 1 (20:31):
Oh, I think you're dead on. I think you're absolutely
dead on. And look, Sean, you know this is there's
so much dishonesty that is being pushed by the media
and the left on this issue. It's really stunning. For example,
the left says, oh, well, this has been you know,
Supreme Court precedent, Paul, this has been already settled by

(20:53):
the Supreme Court for over a century. That's a lie.
I'm telling you, it's a blatant lie. The Supreme Court
has never, ever, in the last century, ruled on whether
illegal aliens who have children that their children should be
given automatic US citizenship. They have never ruled on the issue.

(21:19):
It's a complete lie. So there is no quote unquote
Supreme Court precedent. No, they just began. This happened about
really forty fifty years ago. They just they just began
to assume that this was the interpretation and nobody had

(21:39):
the guts to challenge it. Look Sean. Just to give
you an example, Okay, in the nineteen twenties, Hey, now
we're talking one hundred years ago, there was a huge
guest worker program here in America, and millions of Mexicans
came to the United States. Now we're not talking illegal,

(22:00):
they're legal. They're completely legal. But they're guest workers, meaning
you know, you're gonna be here for three years or
five years or whatever. You're going to work, and after
the program ends, you're expected to go back. Many of
those Mexicans who came had children while they were here. Now,
when the Great Depression hit, the Congress got rid of

(22:25):
this guest worker program, saying we don't have enough jobs
for our own people, never mind for you know, for
foreigners like you from from Mexico. So every single Mexican
in that guest worker program was repatriated. They were all
sent back, okay, all sent back, including their children. And

(22:45):
the reason why their children were sent back because it
never occurred to anyone. Now we're talking nineteen thirties to say, oh, well, well,
Fourteenth Amendment. They were born in the United States, hence
they're subject to the jurisdiction of America. Hence they're American citizens.

(23:07):
Because everybody properly understood a as you put it, you
have to be a resident, a real permanent resident of
the United States. B. This was meant to give full
citizenship and rights to the freed slaves after the Civil War.
Remember the Amendment is written in nineteen sorry, in eighteen

(23:28):
sixty eight d you know, to all the libs out there,
the three years after the Civil War. Hello, right after
the eighteen sixty six Civil Rights Act. So the intent
of the framers of the fourteenth Amendment, and that's what

(23:48):
I mean. That's why I think if this goes to
the Supreme Court, Trump's gonna win. It was never intended
to apply to immigrants in general, but never mind illegals
or people here on temporary visas, or tourists who are
citizens of other countries and are just here for a

(24:10):
week or two to have a good time. So it
was always assumed like any other country in the world. Here, Sean,
you decide to go to England just for the hell
of it, get you and your better half, and your
better half is oh eight and a half months pregnant.
Don't worry, honey, we'll just be there for a few weeks. Well,
the time we get back to Kentucky, we'll have the baby. Oops,

(24:34):
you're in London. You're out looking at Buckingham Palace. Sean,
it's kicking. You're kidding. No, I think my water broke Sean. No, yeah, okay.
You go to the hospital in London. Your wife has
a baby on British soil. You think Britain just says hey, Sean,
welcome to the ancestral homeland. Welcome to the original motherland.

(24:59):
Your child now is British. No, I say, you're crazy.
Your child's an American happen to be born in an
English and in a London hospital. Will take care of
your baby. Obviously, we don't want the baby to die.
But when it's time for you to go back on
British airways in a week or ten days, you're taking

(25:22):
your baby with you and have a nice life. Your
baby's not a British citizen only in this country. Under
the perverse reading and misinterpretation, the perversion of the fourteenth Amendment,
do we have this where people come here sometimes literally

(25:43):
for a day, like think of their logic. You're on
a layover, you're traveling, say to Japan from Europe, you're pregnant,
you have premature delivery, you land in Seattle, or you
land in San Francisco for a layover, and all of

(26:04):
a sudden, now on your way to Japan, you have
a baby. Your baby now is an American citizen. I mean,
just hello, just common sense, sean, agree, disagree, final word
to you.

Speaker 2 (26:20):
I totally agree with what you're saying. And one of
the things that's also interesting where you draw the European
comparisons is, you know, for my job, I travel to
Germany quite often, and when you go to Germany, everything
is in German. Everybody is German. But it's very difficult

(26:42):
to find someone that doesn't speak English. They all speak English.
They all start learning English whenever they're quite young. However,
if I were to try to become a German citizen,
it would be required that I would take a test
and prove that I can speak German. So again, we
like to the left likes to pick and choose, you

(27:04):
know what portions of our European friends are good or bad.
But most European countries wouldn't even let you become a
citizen if you can't speak their language.

Speaker 1 (27:17):
You're dead on. In fact, many European countries, I mean
they're loosening it now a little bit, but many European
countries you have to prove not only that you can
speak the language, but in many case there's a nationality
or an ethnicity requirement. In other words, Sean do you
have is your mother of German ancestry you know? Or

(27:39):
is your father of German ancestry? For many decades after
World War Two, if you did not have a German
name or you can prove a German lineage or German ancestry,
then you were just given guest worker status. And that's,
by the way, that was the deal with the Turks.
There were many Turks who worked at Turkish workers who

(28:02):
worked in Germany, some of them for three generations literally
three generations. So you know, the grandfather comes, he works,
not a German citizen, a resident on a visa work
visa I guess worker program, but not a citizen, has
a child in Germany, same thing worker, and then that

(28:22):
child has another child. Still you're not German. Now the
Turks really resent that. It was a big issue with Turkey.
So what I'm saying is even some European countries. If
you're not, you know, you don't show an ethnic or
national lineage, they still won't give you citizenship. But you're right,
at a minimum, you have to speak the language. Sean

(28:47):
excellent call, excellent points. Anyway, So look, very very heated debate.
The left is going bananas. You even have many establishment Republicans,
many neo conservatives who also support open borders and massive,
unlimited immigration into the country, who love this interpretation of

(29:08):
the fourteenth Amendment about anchor babies and birth tourism. So
my question to you, should we continue the practice of
anchor babies if an illegal alien comes into our country? Say,
and this is very common MS thirteen. It's not just men,

(29:32):
it's women. They have a lot of women who work
in MS thirteen. Human traffickers, drug traffickers, you name it.
They bring in weapons, and when they're here, they have children.
Their children over the last thirty forty years have been
conferred automatic US citizenship. And in fact it's a way

(29:55):
that the drug traffickers and the gangs use to exploit
our loopholes and our immigration law. They have these children
on American soil, they become American citizens, and then they say, well,
you don't want to separate parents from children, so the
rights that are conferred upon the child are automatically then

(30:15):
extended to mommy and daddy. And that's why many of
them also collect I'm not kidding, welfare, Section eight, public housing,
free healthcare, EBT cards, and everything under the sun, you
name it. And so that's why it becomes hard to

(30:35):
get rid of them. Because they have children. They go, well,
you're not going to separate me from my child, are you?
So should we have the practice of anchor babies. Furthermore,
and many in Florida, many in California. I can't tell
you how many emails, text messages, messages on Messenger that
I get. Jeff, I work in a hospital, Jeff, I

(30:58):
work in the tourism in this they come from China,
they come from the from the Middle East, Saudi Arabia, Cutter,
the United Emirates. It's a deliberate policy. They come when
their wives are usually about nine months pregnant. They stay
for a couple of weeks, bang they deliberately have the

(31:20):
baby in an American hospital. The baby is given American citizenship,
they fly right back because then they know with their
child they can come to the United States at will,
and then because their child's an American citizen, they can
stay any time they want and get all of the rights, privileges,

(31:42):
and benefits of an American citizen. And as I said,
the term is called literally birth tourism, and it's with millions.
Millions have used this to falsely, deceptively have citizenship conferred

(32:02):
upon their children. No other country, forget the world, in
the history of the world, has allowed this. We do.
It's suicide. And Trump says it has to end. He
signed an executive order protecting the meaning and value of

(32:26):
American citizenship. It's already been challenged by Democrats, and already
a judge's blocked it. Trump says he's going to appeal.
Hopefully the Supreme Court will take it up. So my
question to you, should illegals have the right to have
children in America who then are become automatic Americans? I say,

(32:49):
it's insane. What say you? Lines are jammed? Natalie in Lunenburg.
Thanks for holding Natalie, and welcome.

Speaker 3 (33:00):
I'm want to give you my condolences on the loss
of your father too.

Speaker 1 (33:04):
Thank you.

Speaker 3 (33:05):
Yeah, you know, we're like family here Coooner Country in
the morning, so when that hits you, it hits us all,
and I just want to let you know that we
all support you in that way.

Speaker 1 (33:13):
Thank you, Thank you, Natalie.

Speaker 3 (33:15):
I do agree with you, Jeff, But that whole concept
of what you just laid out as absurd, that wasn't
the intent. It's obviously the intent that the Amendment was
that to protect the rights of formerly enslaved people to
be citizens. Because duh, that was a no brainer. Professor Kooner,

(33:36):
Could you tell me did that also apply to Native
Americans or did that come later?

Speaker 1 (33:42):
No, that's a brilliant question. No, that's the other thing. Look,
there's a Supreme Court case about maybe twenty years is
called Elk versus Wilkins eighteen eighty four. Don't quote me
on that. It could be eighty three, eighty five, but
it was about sixteen seventeen years after the Fourteenth Amendment
was ratified eighteen sixty eight, in which literally the question was, well,

(34:06):
Native American Indians are they US citizens? And at the
time the Supreme Court ruled no, based on the Fourteenth Amendment,
subject to the jurisdiction thereof why because Native American Indians
were part of the they're on a tribal reservation. And

(34:27):
so the argument was, they're a member of that tribe,
they're a member of that tribal or that tribal reservation,
and so their full allegiance is to their tribe and
to their reservation. It is, and the tribes had basically
semi sovereignty on their land. So they said, no, they

(34:49):
were not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
So even though they were born on American soil, they
were excluded from US citizenship. Now, eventually, about twenty five
years after that, so we're talking about early nineteen hundreds,
Congress passed a law, the Naturalization Act, which said no, no, no, no,

(35:13):
Native American Indians. If they're born on American soil, obviously
they are American citizens. But just to show you how
even the Supreme Court initially took it forget illegals, forget
you know, immigrants, you know, touring the country, even Native

(35:36):
Americans for about a good thirty forty years after the
Fourteenth Amendment, said well, no, they're not subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States, meaning they don't they don't
they're not born in America, and they owe full allegiance
to America. If you're born in a separate country, or

(35:57):
your parents are born in a separate country, and you're
just traveling in the United States and you happened to
have a child, the Supreme Court ruled repeatedly, well, no,
your allegiance is to the country you're from, it's not
to America. So your child is obviously a citizen of
the country you're from, not a citizen of the United States.

(36:21):
So for a long time, even Native Americans, no matter
how often they were born on American soil, you know,
on reservations and their tribes and their tribal jurisdiction, were
not considered American citizens until Congress passed an act in
the early nineteen hundreds. Is that as I don't know

(36:43):
if I is I clear, Natalie, or did I explain
it properly?

Speaker 3 (36:47):
Right? No, absolutely, thank you for clarifying that. I just
wanted to mention that Lincoln had said, you know, obviously
contemporaneous to that time and issue, he had said that
the enlightened he was confident and an enlightened citizenry under
stand the spirit as well as the letter of the law.
So it's obvious what it was intended. It's absurd, what

(37:07):
the let it's devolved into. But my fear is Jeff,
and I'm glad that you're discussing this. When he did this,
I was nervous about this because I'm nervous that a
politician could negate a constitutional protection that they disagree with.
And I'm not saying I disagree with it with the

(37:27):
waves of a pen. So say God forbid. In four
years we have President aoc okay, and what do you
think is going to happen to the Second Amendment. We
have to look at the big picture here, and you know,
what can be done with an executive order can also
be undone. We need it codified into law. I do

(37:49):
favor changes to the Constitution being made through the ratification process,
which is the way it's been laid out. It should
be hard to change things. But just thinking that isn't
this why we have a Supreme Court was to interpret
laws under the guise of what the Constitution laid out.
And I'm a strict constitutionalist, so to me, it's a

(38:10):
no brainer. But you know, the ignorance in the you know,
with the masses that's been perpetuated deliberately. In my opinion,
I'm not sure where this leads us, but to protect
our constitutional rights, I think that this should be a
slow and sober process. Although I don't disagree with his
point of view.

Speaker 1 (38:31):
Well, no, you nailed it. Look, the point of an
executive order is not to usurp the power of Congress
or the power of the Supreme Court. And so what
Trump is just saying, and I think he's completely right.
He's saying, Look, the Supreme Court has never ever ruled
on birthright citizenship. Okay, in other words, well they have,

(38:51):
but they've never ruled on this issue. An illegal alien
who has a child, is that child an American citizen?
The Supreme Court. Trust me when I tell you this,
Take it to the bank. Everything that they're telling you
is a lie. It's misinformation. The Supreme Court has never

(39:12):
ruled on this issue. So Trump is saying, well, you're
all assuming that just because an illegal crosses the border,
literally just walks across the line, PLoP out comes the baby,
that that's the baby's now an American on what planet?

(39:34):
Let this is why we pay their salaries. Let the
Supreme Court finally rule on this issue. And with the
originalist that we have on the Supreme Court, He's got
a very good shot at winning because it defies law,
the intent and meaning of the fourteenth Amendment, history experience

(39:55):
that could go on and on. It defies common sense.

Speaker 2 (39:59):
You know.

Speaker 1 (39:59):
Look, the the first argument I would make in front
of the Supreme Court with takes me five seconds, is
naming one other country in the history of the world,
not the world, in the history of the world, that
says you willegally come into that country, you have a child,
that child is now automatically a citizen of that country.
One don't bother. You can't find it. So what's so

(40:25):
unique about us? And you're telling us that after a
bloody Civil war? Hello, I mean just look around, and
you know, point your finger to your head. Bodies strewn
everywhere in Gettysburg, Atlanta, raised to the ground, an entire
entire area section of the United States, literally destroyed the South,

(40:50):
six hundred thousand dead, millions maimed and crippled. And we
have the issue now of the slaves who under the
dread Scott decision. Remember he says, eighteen fifty seven is
dread Scott, three years before the Civil War, So dread
Scott is fresh in everybody's mind. Dread Scott said, it

(41:11):
was a despicable decision. It said African Americans are not citizens.
Slaves are not citizens, and so they're not conferred all
the rights and privileges that Americans have. And so the
Republicans in Congress said, no, f and way, this is

(41:35):
not America. This is not what we just fought this
war over. So they passed the Civil Rights Act. And
then someone said, yeah, but you can overturn the Civil
Rights Act. They said, Okay, damn it, We're gonna do
a fourteenth Amendment. We'll amend the Constitution. Now, Natalie, this
is the check ofmate argument. Okay, please look it up.

(41:56):
Don't take my word for it. The main architect of
the Fourteenth Amendment, there were other people who played a role,
but he played by far the seminal, vital role. This
is widely universally acknowledged, is a senator by the name
of Jacob Howard. Jacob Howard, he authored the fourteenth Amendment

(42:21):
and he pretty much drove it through ratification. Howard himself
was asked, well, hold on, does this mean anybody just
come to the United States and they have a baby
and they just get citizenship. Here is what Howard said,
citizenship does not apply to the children of foreigners his words, aliens, diplomats,

(42:56):
or the consoles or ministers on American soil. So according
to the man who wrote and ratified the fourteenth Amendment,
in fact, I'll get you in the nineteenth century language,
I'll quote to everybody what he said. But he openly said, no,

(43:18):
it doesn't apply to foreigners. So you mean some guy
from Britain comes and visits the United States and his
wife is pregnant, has a baby. Suddenly this person's an
American citizen a local aliens literally means someone who's here illegal,
because no, they wouldn't even apply it to diplomats. You know,

(43:42):
for example, the ambassador of France, who's allowed to be
in America has every right to be in America. No,
he said, if their children are born their citizens of France. Now,
as a courtesy the American government. But it's a courtesy,
not a right. They said, we will give your child

(44:03):
a legal residency, basically their version of a green card. Okay,
they don't want to leave because maybe some of them
have been here for twenty years and they've gone to
school here. Okay, fine, you're not going to be a
citizen because we still fear your allegiance may be to France,
but will let you stay in our country. But that's

(44:25):
I'm talking diplomats, you know, ambassadors you know, and their children.
But so Jake, the author of the Fourteenth Amendment, answered
the question himself. That's why Trump, I'm telling you in private,
I know the lawyers that are advising them. They're from
the Claremont Institute. The key lawyer is a lawyer. He's

(44:47):
a brilliant constitutional professor and lawyer. His name is John Eastman,
east m a n. He's written books on this, articles
on this, columns on this. He's a brilliant man, one
of the most brilliant constitutional law professors in the country.

(45:07):
He helped write that executive order. So I know who's
advising Trump. And Eastman says, just get in front of
the Supreme Court. We're gonna go to town on these people.
So we're gonna cite the original drafter and author of
the Fourteenth Amendment, Clarence Thomas. Is gonna vote yes. Alito's

(45:30):
gonna vote yes. Kavanaugh's gonna vote yes. I hope Amy
Coney Barrett votes yes. She should vote yes. Gorge sic
Will vote yes, you're gonna have at least five justices,
maybe six. We just got to get it to the
Supreme Court. That's Trump's plan, and you're right, Natalie, that's

(45:52):
the job of the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution
and issue a ruling. And that's what Trump says in private. Okay, guys,
earn your salary. Natalie, final word to you.

Speaker 3 (46:07):
I was hoping when this came down that it was Trump,
you know, playing chess here and trying to get this
finally established. But I mean I could see that it
would be blocked when he issued it. It's like, oh no,
they're gonna have an injunction against that. So I'm not surprised,
but I do support it. They think it's just common sense,
and it's not just I mean, they're obviously playing a loophole.

(46:29):
You know. The left always wants to like close the
loopholes for the rich. You know, they always scream that.
So it's like, well, this is a loophole, and it's not.
It's absurd. So I hope that it prevails. But we
have a squishy court, so I'm not as confident as you,
but I hope I'm wrong.

Speaker 1 (46:49):
Let me Natalie, just before you go. Okay, this is
what Senator Jacob Howard wrote. He was asked specifically about
the fourteenth Amendment. Well, what does this mean, you know,
for foreigners in America, immigrants, diplomats. Here's what he wrote. Okay,
it's in the nineteenth century language, but it's here. It
is you can hear. Everybody will understand this quote. Okay,

(47:10):
so this is straight from the proverbial horse's mouth. Quote.
Every person born within the limits of the United States
and subject to their jurisdiction, is, by virtue of natural
law and national law, a citizen of the United States.

(47:31):
Now here it comes. This will not, of course, now
notice he says, of course, like it's self evident, this
will not, of course include persons born in the United
States who are foreigners, aliens who belong to the families

(47:53):
of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of
the United States, but will include every other class of person.
So in a Nutshelleys saying, look, it applies to African Americans,
it applies to former slaves, it applies to the freed slaves,
maybe even to Native American Indians. We shall see, We're

(48:16):
gonna work this out. But it does not apply to foreigners,
i e. Immigrants, It does not apply to aliens. It
doesn't even apply to diplomats and ambassadors. Case closed.

Speaker 2 (48:34):
To me.

Speaker 1 (48:34):
That's that's why John Eastman and at the Claremont Institute
are telling Trump take it to the Supreme Court. We're
gonna win this. Natalie, thank you very very much for
that call. Six one seven two six six sixty eight
sixty eight is the number. So what the left is
now done is they've deliberately misinterpreted the fourteenth Amendment. And

(48:58):
I keep that they leave out that pivot clause subject
to the jurisdiction thereof. And they're see, they're preying upon
people's ignorance of history and ignorance of the Constitution and
frankly lack of common sense. And that's why again I

(49:18):
gotta give Trump his due. That guy's got forgive me.
The guy's got balls. You know, even Reagan didn't challenge
birthright citizenship, just to give an example, and Trump's like, no, man, no,
we're gonna lose our country. Is it's out of control.
Six one seven two six six sixty eight sixty eight. Okay,

(49:42):
let me ask all of you should an illegal alien
who comes into our country illegally and has a child
on American soil. Should that child be given all the
rights and privileges of an American citizen? Say absolutely not.
This is insane. As one person famously said, the Constitution

(50:08):
is not a suicide pact. But that's me. I want
to hear from you six one seven two six six
sixty eight sixty eight. And we have a lot of nurses,
a lot of people in the medical field who listen
to our to the Kuna Report. Have you seen instances

(50:28):
of birth tourism where you work? I don't. We have
people in California, in Florida that listen. It's very prevalent there.
But even here in Massachusetts, have you seen wealthy foreigners
come to our hospitals where their wives, girlfriends, whatever, will
have a child deliberately just to get citizenship and then

(50:52):
they're out