An executive order cannot repeal birthright citizenship, period.

An executive order cannot repeal birthright citizenship, period.

Should President Trump make good on his threats to sign an executive order ending birthright citizenship, the move would be both legally and procedurally invalid. In an op-ed for The New York Daily News, I outline several obstacles the President’s stated intent, starting with the legal precedent that should prevent an executive order voiding the 14th Amendment.

An even stronger counterpoint to an executive order is the fact that only a change to the Constitution can effectively end birthright citizenship, and this would have to come from a Congressional decision, not a unilateral order issued by the President.

My third, and final point of contention comes from the sheer impracticality of the move. There is no clear procedure for handling the children and families that would be affected by such an order.

For more thorough insight into these points, click on the the link below:

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-an-executive-order-cannot-repeal-birthright-citizenship-period-20181031-story.html

Refugees In The Empire State: A Panel Discussion – 8/20/18

Refugees In The Empire State: A Panel Discussion – 8/20/18

I was honored to participate in an hour-long panel discussion on WCNY about how President Trump’s immigration changes are affecting people in NY. The show is available via live-stream starting Monday Aug. 20 at 10 pm at http://www.wcny.org/connect-ny/. A preview is currently available via the same link.

Please join me and my fellow panelists as we discuss immigration policy, and how New York State is responding to the needs of refugees and the effects they have on Central New York communities.

Texas’s DACA Challenge Sets Up Supreme Court Showdown

Texas’s DACA Challenge Sets Up Supreme Court Showdown

In an interview with Bloomberg, I discuss the concern that Texas’s recent DACA challenge could force the issue into the Supreme Court.

Should U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen decide in favor of Texas, he would be in conflict with other U.S. District Judges on the same matter. This could well mean that the issue would be mediated by the U.S. Supreme Court:

““If this judge issues an injunction in Texas’s favor, that definitely gives Trump political cover to say his hands are tied, that he’d like to be compassionate, but a judge made him end DACA,” Yale-Loehr, who has written a 21-volume treatise on immigration law, said in a phone interview. “Then the Justice Department can go back to the Supreme Court and ask them to take up the case now” rather than wait until the other judges’ decisions wind their way up through appellate courts, he said.”

While some feel this would be the end of  DACA, the outcome could still be uncertain:

…”no one can predict with certainty how the recently reconstituted high court will view immigration policies implemented by a president without congressional approval, which is the complaint that both Texas and the Trump administration have lodged against the Obama initiatives. ( – Bloomber Politics)”

Click on the link below to read the full article:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-02/texas-s-daca-challenge-sets-up-supreme-court-dreamer-showdown

 

Trump’s Own Tweets Help Kill His Government’s Travel Ban, Again

Trump’s Own Tweets Help Kill His Government’s Travel Ban, Again

I commented again on President Trump’s travel ban tweets and their negative effect defending his legislation. For the second time, the President’s own comments have aided the courts in knocking down his executive order.

Fortune covers this issue in the article, here.

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refuses to reinstate Trump’s travel ban

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refuses to reinstate Trump’s travel ban

I was quoted in an LA Times article about the 9th circuit’s refusal to reinstate Trump’s travel ban. I stated the Supreme Court might find it easier to reject the travel ban based on a violation of existing law rather than constitutional grounds.  “It is always hard to win an immigration case on constitutional grounds in the Supreme Court because immigration touches on foreign relations and national sovereignty issues. People outside the United States also generally don’t have U.S. constitutional rights. The combination of the two rulings provides a one-two punch against the executive order that will make it harder for the administration to win at the Supreme Court.”

The LA Times article is here.