# Can a President over rule the Constitution with an Executive Order **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 30, 2018, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725 "2018-10-30T14:42:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2018, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/221 "2018-11-05T06:29:57Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > And again, as I said, I think your side has the better argument, but once again those on the left want to argue that ANY contrary position to leftist ideology is unreasonable, racist, and a reason to keep brown people out of the country. Keep debating this way and watch the divide continue. “Leftist ideology”? :dubious: Interpreting the 14th amendment the way it was clearly intended by its authors and has been interpreted since its passing now qualifies as “leftist ideology”? The entire purpose of this part of the 14th amendment was giving birthright citizenship to everyone born in the US, in order to counteract the Dred Scott decision. This isn’t controversial. This isn’t something legal scholars hold serious debates about. If you can find a legal scholar who disagrees with this interpretation, the correct response is to ask, “How the fuck do you qualify as a legal scholar, you hack?” It’s like finding a biologist who doesn’t believe in evolution, or a historian who doubts the holocaust - congratulations, you found an idiot whose reasoning is almost certainly grossly motivated. Nice one. It’s not a close one. It’s not that “my side” has the better argument, it’s that the other side’s argument is _baseless and insane_. And y’know what? I’m just gonna reiterate my previous statement. The people saying this might not be white nationalists, but they are making the same arguments as white nationalists, are appealing to white nationalists, and are making white nationalists pretty darn happy. :mad: Past a certain point you stop giving these fuckers the benefit of the doubt. This is about keeping America white. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2018, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/222 "2018-11-05T17:21:43Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > “Leftist ideology”? :dubious: Interpreting the 14th amendment the way it was clearly intended by its authors and has been interpreted since its passing now qualifies as “leftist ideology”? The entire purpose of this part of the 14th amendment was giving birthright citizenship to everyone born in the US, in order to counteract the Dred Scott decision. This isn’t controversial. This isn’t something legal scholars hold serious debates about. If you can find a legal scholar who disagrees with this interpretation, the correct response is to ask, “How the fuck do you qualify as a legal scholar, you hack?” It’s like finding a biologist who doesn’t believe in evolution, or a historian who doubts the holocaust - congratulations, you found an idiot whose reasoning is almost certainly grossly motivated. Nice one. It’s not a close one. It’s not that “my side” has the better argument, it’s that the other side’s argument is _baseless and insane_. > > And y’know what? I’m just gonna reiterate my previous statement. The people saying this might not be white nationalists, but they are making the same arguments as white nationalists, are appealing to white nationalists, and are making white nationalists pretty darn happy. :mad: Past a certain point you stop giving these fuckers the benefit of the doubt. This is about keeping America white. You know what us entitled leftist dilettantes are like. Always coming up with ridiculous whines based on whatever PC terminology is cool that week, like “stop oppressing me with your crypto-fascist bad vibes”, “you are just an agent of the hetronormative patriarchy!”, and “the president can’t revoke a constitutional amendment by executive order” All totally bonkers, right? We all need to grow up and get a job. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2018, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/223 "2018-11-05T18:12:40Z")
> [@Chopsticks](#): > > So let’s say the executive order goes through. “Natural born citizen” is not defined in the Constitution. Does that mean, if the Democrats take control of Congress at some point, they can change the law to say “Donald Trump is not a US citizen”? I believe the current status of court precedent is that you cannot lose citizenship through Congressional action so no. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2018, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/224 "2018-11-05T19:29:13Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > I believe the current status of court precedent is that you cannot lose citizenship through Congressional action so no. What a leftist thing to say. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2018, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/225 "2018-11-05T20:48:14Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > I believe the current status of court precedent is that you cannot lose citizenship through Congressional action so no. And the current status of legal precedent is that Korumatsu is bad law, under Trump v. Hawaii, and remanded the travel ban to earlier courts to see if the actual order was constitutional, establishing the executive orders are still subject to judicial constitutionality tests. As current precedent is that the 14th Amendment establishes birthright citizenship, an attempt to overturn this via executive order should therefore be declared unconstitutional. As it is the plain text of the Constitution that establishes this, even textualist/originalist judged should find such. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2018, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/226 "2018-11-05T22:22:46Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > And again, as I said, I think your side has the better argument, but once again those on the left want to argue that ANY contrary position to leftist ideology is unreasonable, racist, and a reason to keep brown people out of the country. Keep debating this way and watch the divide continue. Dude. Do you agree or not that ever since the 14th Amendment was ratified, everyone born in the United States has been treated as a US citizen? Even Negroes? This is the way the law has been interpreted since it was established. Now you’re saying that we can just change that based on the President’s whim? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/227 "2018-11-06T04:39:55Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Really? You think so? > > And you are a lawyer, correct? Again, if you think I’m wrong about this or anything, I would appreciate you pointing out how I am wrong instead of personally attacking me. I ask you to stop doing this or start or join a Pit thread. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 11:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/228 "2018-11-06T11:00:04Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Again, if you think I’m wrong about this or anything, I would appreciate you pointing out how I am wrong instead of personally attacking me. Why don’t you cite the part of title 18 that provides for extraterritorial jurisdiction over all murders of a US national abroad. ---
**Author:** ![Wolf333](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolf333/32/3460_2.png) [@Wolf333](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wolf333)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/229 "2018-11-06T11:19:29Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Again, if you think I’m wrong about this or anything, I would appreciate you pointing out how I am wrong instead of personally attacking me. > > I ask you to stop doing this or start or join a Pit thread. You made the claim. Provide the cite. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/230 "2018-11-06T14:42:50Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > Dude. > > Do you agree or not that ever since the 14th Amendment was ratified, everyone born in the United States has been treated as a US citizen? Even Negroes? Mostly true. But until 1924, with the passage of the [Indian Citizenship Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Citizenship_Act), many Native Americans born in the US were not considered or treated as citizens. And we’ve already noted that children of diplomats born here were not. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/231 "2018-11-06T15:28:52Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Why don’t you cite the part of title 18 that provides for extraterritorial jurisdiction over all murders of a US national abroad. I’ll concede that it only applies to U.S. Nationals. My confusion was that the Government is using any tangential connection to the United States to exercise jurisdiction. For example, and I’ll find a cite later, a Mexican national murders another Mexican national entirely in Mexico, but he was part of a drug cartel and some of the drugs enter the United States. The Government will use that nexus to assert jurisdiction over the murder. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/232 "2018-11-06T15:59:12Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > I’ll concede that it only applies to U.S. Nationals. Look closer. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/233 "2018-11-06T17:09:56Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Mostly true. But until 1924, with the passage of the [Indian Citizenship Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Citizenship_Act), many Native Americans born in the US were not considered or treated as citizens. And we’ve already noted that children of diplomats born here were not. Neither of whom are under the jurisdiction of the united states (according to the regular way the word is defined in the English language and US legal tradition, without redefining it to disenfranchise brown people) . Cases like [Ex parte Crow Dog](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1850-1900/109us556) show the Indian tribes were NOT under the jurisdiction of the US. Additionally Native Americans who were under US jurisdiction (as demonstrated, for example by paying taxes) were considered citizens before the Indian Citizenship Act. Likewise for diplomats, they are absolutely unambiguously not under US jurisdiction (and were like who the framers had in mind when they added the “under US jurisdiction” part) ---
**Author:** ![postpic200](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/54ee81/32.png) [@postpic200](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/postpic200)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/234 "2018-11-06T17:34:34Z")
> [@Clu-Me-In](#): > > [Donald Trump says he will overrule the 14th with an Executive order.](https://youtu.be/H355oS-c_3A) Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. While he couldn’t overrule the Constitution, he could say his interpretation of 14th is that given the parents are here illegally, they are not subject to the jurisdiction, and that any child born to them is also not subject to the jurisdiction, and thus not a citizen. In the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark his parents appeared to be in the US legally when he was born, as his parents had permanent domicile and residence in the United States. So would that apply to someone who is breaking immigration law? Trump could say No and setup a supreme court fight. I’m willing to bet he’d lose. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/235 "2018-11-06T17:40:15Z")
> [@postpic200](#): > > Section 1. > > All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. > > While he couldn’t overrule the Constitution, he could say his interpretation of 14th is that given the parents are here illegally, they are not subject to the jurisdiction, and that any child born to them is also not subject to the jurisdiction, and thus not a citizen. In the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark his parents appeared to be in the US legally when he was born, as his parents had permanent domicile and residence in the United States. > > So would that apply to someone who is breaking immigration law? Trump could say No and setup a supreme court fight. I’m willing to bet he’d lose. Likewise he could claim (in his executive order making him president for life) that his interpretation of the word “two” in the 22nd amendment is that it actually means “any non-prime number”. So no overruling Constituion there, move along citizen (sorry “move along temporary resident at the whim of the president for life”) ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/236 "2018-11-06T17:48:50Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Neither of whom are under the jurisdiction of the united states (according to the regular way the word is defined in the English language and US legal tradition, without redefining it to disenfranchise brown people) . > > Cases like [Ex parte Crow Dog](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1850-1900/109us556) show the Indian tribes were NOT under the jurisdiction of the US. Additionally Native Americans who were under US jurisdiction (as demonstrated, for example by paying taxes) were considered citizens before the Indian Citizenship Act. > > Likewise for diplomats, they are absolutely unambiguously not under US jurisdiction (and were like who the framers had in mind when they added the “under US jurisdiction” part) read the post I was responding to ---
**Author:** ![OldGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/3bc359/32.png) [@OldGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/237 "2018-11-06T20:42:52Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Likewise he could claim (in his executive order making him president for life) that his interpretation of the word “two” in the 22nd amendment is that it actually means “any non-prime number”. That would be just like Trump to declare 2 to be non-prime. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/238 "2018-11-06T21:29:01Z")
> [@OldGuy](#): > > That would be just like Trump to declare 2 to be non-prime. That would be irrational. ---
**Author:** ![Chisquirrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6bbea6/32.png) [@Chisquirrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chisquirrel)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/239 "2018-11-06T21:41:46Z")
> [@postpic200](#): > > Section 1. > > All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. > > While he couldn’t overrule the Constitution, he could say his interpretation of 14th is that given the parents are here illegally, they are not subject to the jurisdiction, and that any child born to them is also not subject to the jurisdiction, and thus not a citizen. In the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark his parents appeared to be in the US legally when he was born, as his parents had permanent domicile and residence in the United States. > > So would that apply to someone who is breaking immigration law? Trump could say No and setup a supreme court fight. I’m willing to bet he’d lose. _Plyler v. Doe_ settled that already. Children born on US soil are US citizens, no matter the status of their parents. Decision and dissent agree on this point. So no, Trump and **UltraVires** don’t even have the figment of a legal leg to stand on here. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725/240 "2018-11-06T22:07:27Z")
> [@Chisquirrel](#): > > _Plyler v. Doe_ settled that already. Children born on US soil are US citizens, no matter the status of their parents. Decision and dissent agree on this point. Did that case settle the citizenship issue of the 14th or just the “equal protection” issue? My understanding is that it was the latter. Citizenship was not at issue in that case. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-president-over-rule-the-constitution-with-an-executive-order/823725.md?page=13)