To the editor: I’m infinitely grateful that the right-wing Supreme Courtroom, and never the right-wing political apologist Josh Hammer, will likely be deciding the constitutionality of President Trump’s royal decree purporting to trump 157 years of considerably settled legislation. (“Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship is legally sound,” Opinion, Jan. 30)
It solely turns into unsettled (or, per Hammer, “foolish” and “lifeless unsuitable”) by both ignoring or vaporizing constitutional readability, Supreme Courtroom precedent and congressional law-making.
The courtroom’s Wong Kim Ark choice in 1898 affirmed birthright citizenship, utilized it to the youngsters of immigrant mother and father “domiciled right here” and was not written with disappearing ink.
The perfect Hammer can muster is that the Supreme Courtroom didn’t “correctly perceive” the 14th Modification, the case was “wrongly determined” (in different phrases, Hammer doesn’t prefer it), and the justice who penned the choice “inexplicably reversed course” from prior statements.
Hammer says a 1982 case (Plyler vs. Doe), which comparatively just lately held that the Ark choice meant exactly what it mentioned, needs to be ignored as a result of the reference was in a footnote and due to this fact not binding (Hammer is solely flat-out unsuitable right here).
Lastly, what is actually “foolish” is the thought {that a} president can change the Structure and citizenship guidelines by mere fiat and fountain pen. The emperor’s new garments are lavish, extravagant and nonexistent.
Roland Wrinkle, Newhall
The author is an legal professional.
..
To the editor: Hammer’s op-ed article lauding Trump’s government order ostensibly nixing the birthright citizenship clause of the 14th Modification misses the constitutional boat.
The problem is just not, as Hammer avers, whether or not the president is correct or unsuitable in his constitutional evaluation of the topic clause. (Hammer agrees with Trump’s evaluation; I take situation with it.)
It’s, reasonably, whether or not within the first place Trump has the authority by way of an government order to amend or in any other case alter the Structure. Manifestly, he doesn’t. Solely by prescribed votes by way of direct congressional motion (or by way of a constitutional conference) after which upon acceptable ratification by state legislatures could the Structure be modified.
At present, Trump could also be very highly effective — however he isn’t that highly effective.
Scott Roth, Sherman Oaks
The author is an legal professional.
