Former President Donald Trump is back in the news, this time with a proposal that has left legal scholars stunned and has civil rights activists on high alert. ”To the point of deporting people who have violated drug laws. “Even American citizens who break criminal laws can be deported. Trump Calls For Deporting Not Just Immigrants But American Citizens Convicted Of Crimes.
“They’re old to our country,” Trump declared, in the sort of extemporaneous swagger that has become a signature of his campaign trail. “Many of them in our country.’’ I think we’ve got to get them the hell outta here, too, to tell you the truth.
Check out this Related Article: Judge Calls Music Mogul Diddy "Too Dangerous" to Release Despite Partial Acquittal
The pundits may have applauded, but the red flag was raised immediately among legal professionals. “It’s just not how our legal system operates,” said Amanda Frost, a law professor at the University of Virginia. Non-negotiable, ironclad citizenship by birth is written into the U.S. Constitution. An individual’s criminal record, no matter how damning, cannot serve as a legal justification for stripping citizenship from someone born on American soil.
And Trump’s remarks, however overblown, weren’t mere rhetorical fireworks. They followed a June 11, 2025, memo to federal prosecutors by the Department of Justice ordering an increase in the denaturalization of people, mostly those suspected of being terrorists, war criminals, or who had lied about their immigration histories. That is a big move in its own right. But alongside Trump’s talk of deporting the native born, this doesn’t sound so much like law enforcement as a stress test of American democracy.
Dr. Nola Haynes of Georgetown University was more blunt: “This isn’t about crime or immigration or national security. This is defending Trump wanting to play dictator, to toss democracy and the rule of law off a cliff.”
Legal experts from across the political spectrum agree: This proposal isn’t just unlawful, but it’s reckless. Citizenship isn’t a prize for good behavior. It’s a right, and any attempt to undermine it opens a Pandora’s box that the Constitution tried to close forever.
What may be most chilling, however, is the pattern that emerges. Ramped-up rhetoric, vague legal standards like “good moral character,” and an increasing push to allow prosecutors vast discretion to decide who “deserves” to stay, these are more than mere political talking points. Still, they are the bricks of authoritarian rule.
0 Comments