Key Takeaways:
– Trump’s executive orders may get hit with legal challenges.
– Stopping birthright citizenship is unconstitutional, says legal experts.
– The use of the Alien Enemies Act for mass deportations may not hold water in court.
– Declaring a national emergency at the southern border could face similarly steep hurdles.
– His idea to retake the Panama Canal is criticized as morally and legally unjustifiable.
Trump’s Future Executive Actions Under Fire
In news that has stirred up the political waters, President Trump is preparing numerous executive orders that many legal experts are labeling as serious abuses of power. It’s predicted these might not pass a legal examination. Among the upcoming decisions, his immigration policies are particularly controversial and are expected to face immediate legal pushback.
Unconstitutional Birthright Citizenship Stance
One of the main bones of contention lies in Trump’s intentions of abolishing birthright citizenship for the children of unauthorized immigrants. Trump plans to argue that illegal immigrants aren’t under U.S. jurisdiction, but critics argue this logic is faulty. If they weren’t subject to U.S. laws, they couldn’t be arrested.
Many legal scholars insist that this stance is unequivocally unconstitutional. According to Section 1 of the Amendment, citizenship is granted to anyone born in the United States. Longstanding Supreme Court precedents back up this interpretation.
Abuse of the Alien Enemies Act
Trump’s planned use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act for mass deportations is also being questioned. He hopes to use the Act as grounds for mass deportations. By virtue of this law, any citizen from a country the U.S. is at declared war with can be deported, or in certain cases, arrested.
There’s one catch though — the U.S. is not currently in an official war with any foreign country. So, the use of this Act in this context might not stand up in court.
Questionable Southern Border Emergency
Trump is also planning to declare a national emergency at the southern border. While this move might have a better chance of holding up in court, critics argue that there’s no real crisis happening there. Some even argue that the emergency is simply a manufactured political move.
Fact checking sources say illegal entries have hit their lowest point since August 2020. This fact doesn’t mesh well with the idea of a sudden crisis at the border. However, since dealings with emergencies usually fall under the executive branch’s powers, courts might be more likely to defer to Trump’s decision.
Taking Back the Panama Canal – a Legal and Moral Quandary
One of Trump’s most controversial ideas has been to regain control of the Panama Canal. Critics argue that there’s no justifiable moral or legal argument for this. The U.S. did hand over the Canal to Panama back in 1999, and critics argue it would be detrimental to take it back now.
A move like this would hurt the U.S.’ international relations, especially with Panama, a crucial ally. It would tarnish the U.S.’s reputation on the international stage. On top of that, no clear reasons have been given to justify such an action.
In sum, Trump’s upcoming executive orders face numerous legal and moral challenges. These drastic measures seem to be making waves before they even come to pass. It remains to be seen how they will hold up against constitutional law and the court of public opinion.