Donald Trump is trying to accomplish things during his time in office, but Lilliputians in the bureaucracy and courts constantly oppose him. This constant opposition is not only pointless, but it is also seriously harmful to the country.
State Banquet Room
The so-called “ballroom” is more than that, and it was on Trump’s “Do List” long before he ran for office. He offered the funds to build it while Barack Obama was President.
Trump is embarrassed by the current setup. When the American President is invited to a state dinner in a foreign country, the event is held in a real building with a solid floor. It’s the kind of place suitable for gentlemen in tuxedos and tails and ladies in gowns and high heels. Indoor toilets are available for actual needs and to serve as an excuse to leave the table when needed.
In the United States, if anywhere else, state dinners are held on a lawn. Presumably, some kind of wooden planking is used as flooring to protect the grass and make walking a little easier. Would you believe the United States of America provides port-a-potties?
Any citizen with an ounce of pride in the country would find this both embarrassing and outrageous.
Then there is the more genuine issue of security. State dinners involve multiple world leaders and senior government officials. Even if President Trump hadn’t already been the subject of multiple assassination attempts, the case for moving them inside a secure building is so obvious that even lawyers and journalists should be able to understand it.
To end this absurdity, Trump arranged private funding to build an appropriate facility. As usual, if Trump says “Up,” Lilliput says “Down.”
The self-anointed members of the National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States sued to stop the work. This is insane on several levels. As described above, the work is needed for many reasons. The old wall is torn down. Security facilities are being built underground. The appellate court spent one hundred pages trying to justify its claim to the authority to stop the work. The dissent was thirty-five pages.
Let’s be clear. There is no legal, logical, or security reason not to build this. Donald Trump wants to host an event in this building before his term ends. A bunch of small-minded people in Washington will do everything they can to block it. An ABC News article notes that the administration has asked the Supreme Court to overturn the appellate court’s delay.
The administration’s filing also includes sworn declarations from some of the most senior officials in the government, including from the secretary of state, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as well as the heads of the FBI and Secret Service, in an effort to dramatically lay out the national security justifications for the ballroom.
Birthright Citizenship
It is difficult to know whether the court’s ruling on birthright citizenship (Trump vs. Barbara) is driven by any need to show independence from Trump. It is a financial disaster and rewards criminal behavior. It also gives an enemy nation another way to harm us.
There are two ways to obtain citizenship at birth. It can happen through location [jus soli (the right of the soil)] or by parentage jus sanguinis (the right of blood)]. For example, the children of Americans on duty overseas are considered natural-born citizens if they want to run for President.
Justices Gorsuch and Alito noted that the majority took the early English reading and “soil” interpretation.
That rule, developed in feudal times, had more to do with being a subject than a citizen. It was based on the notion that a man owed personal service to the lord of the soil, the same as his master owed it to the king; and it was born with the child and only ended in the grave.
And Justice Alito noted that the
Court’s interpretation saddles this country with an ancient British rule that even the United Kingdom has abandoned, as have other countries whose legal systems share the same pedigree.
Justice Alito also notes a major security concern. Enemies in the past have raised and trained citizens of their country to look, act, and speak like Americans. They are then planted here as deep agents. This ruling makes that job easier.
Enemy nations can spend a small amount of money on birth tourism and produce a considerable number of American citizens. Neither the parent nor the child was “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States for any significant amount of time. They can be trained to both hate America and act American.
Justice Alito then notes that “Even if he plots to harm this country, he cannot be deprived of his status as a citizen, at least under current precedent.”
Alito closed his dissent with several concerns about the Court’s interpretation. He noted that it “preserves a powerful incentive to enter or remain in this country illegally” and
is not only contrary to the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment, it produces grotesque results. While foreigners who wish to immigrate lawfully must sometimes wait for many years, a child born here to a birth tourist is automatically a citizen.
The dissenters in this case are certain this ruling cannot stand for long and will eventually be reversed by the courts. Perhaps when a President other than Donald Trump makes a similar appeal to protect the nation, it will be socially acceptable to allow it.
Summary
The notion that Donald Trump’s actions are unreasonable or egomaniacal may be politically useful, but it’s not true, at least in these cases. His actions have valid reasons. It is a shame that what is good and needed for the country is being delayed because some people don’t want to let the person proposing it get the credit.