Clarence Thomas comments on SCOTUS decision: 14th Amendment has been ‘used for political agendas’

In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decided that President Donald Trump’s executive order to deny birthright U.S. citizenship to children born in the country to illegal aliens and temporary visa holders is in violation of the 14th Amendment.

“The Civil Rights Act and the Citizenship Clause provide citizenship to anyone born and living in the United States, irrespective of their race,” Thomas stated in his dissent.

He also remarked, “Neither of these guarantees citizenship to someone who isn’t legally residing in the United States.”

Because Black Americans had no other homeland and were loyal to the United States, they were guaranteed citizenship. They shared in the struggles and victories of the nation and were frequently called to fight for it. The Citizenship Clause thus ensured them the rights and respect of American citizenship, protecting them from being treated as second-class citizens before the law.

In contrast, the situation is different for children of temporary foreign residents. Visitors from other countries maintain ties to their home nations and do not share a similar connection to the United States. Historically, it was felt that only those who regarded a place as home could be citizens. Legal residence was pivotal in determining both state and national citizenship. Even temporary visitors retained their national identity, making a child born here but whose parents were not residents as much of a foreigner as their parents.

Thomas emphasized that the wording “subject to no foreign power” in the Fourteenth Amendment, which secures U.S. citizenship for those born in the country, explicitly excludes children of temporary foreign visitors who are influenced by their home country.

“The court has, in an uncommon move, ruled that the executive order which keeps the children of temporary visitors and illegal aliens from citizenship is unconstitutional,” Thomas noted.

This ruling adds to the troubled legacy of the Fourteenth Amendment. Originally designed to grant equal rights to freed Black Americans, it has been reshaped into a political tool. The Reconstruction Congress did not support its application in this manner. I submit that many aspects of the Executive Order align with the original intent of the citizenship clause.

The case is referenced as trump vs barbara no. 25-365 in the United States Supreme Court.