Trump Calls US ‘Stupid’ Over Citizenship Debate

Former President Donald Trump launched a series of criticisms on his Truth Social platform hours before the Supreme Court heard arguments concerning birthright citizenship, labeling the U.S. “stupid” for its longstanding practice. The case centers on whether the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause extends to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents. Trump’s administration previously attempted to limit birthright citizenship to those with at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen or permanent resident.

In a lengthy post, Trump argued the current interpretation of the 14th Amendment allows individuals to exploit the system, specifically citing concerns about “drug cartels.” He claimed the practice wasn’t the original intent and that the U.S. is unique in offering citizenship in this manner. He repeatedly emphasized the historical context of the 14th Amendment, asserting it was designed to protect the children of slaves following the Civil War and had no bearing on contemporary immigration.

“The United States of America is the only Country in the World that does this, for what reason, nobody knows — But the drug cartels love it!” Trump wrote. He characterized the U.S. as “stupid” for adhering to what he sees as an easily exploited policy, framing it as a matter of national security rather than a legal debate. He reiterated this point in a follow-up post, again stressing the post-Civil War origins of the amendment.

The Supreme Court is considering a challenge to this established legal precedent, though legal scholars across the political spectrum generally agree the 14th Amendment clearly grants citizenship to all born on U.S. soil, with limited exceptions like children of diplomats. Trump’s rhetoric, however, frames the issue as a matter of common sense and national vulnerability, attempting to sway public opinion as the court deliberates.

While Trump’s focus on the historical context of the 14th Amendment isn’t entirely inaccurate – the amendment was ratified in the wake of the Civil War to address the status of formerly enslaved people – his assertion that this is the sole basis for the current interpretation is a significant oversimplification. The Supreme Court has consistently affirmed the broad application of birthright citizenship for over a century, and the historical context is just one piece of a complex legal framework. His framing of the issue as a deliberate “scam” perpetrated by those seeking to exploit the U.S. immigration system is inflammatory and lacks substantive legal grounding. The court’s decision will have significant implications for immigration law and the rights of millions of Americans.