President Donald Trump has issued an executive order to revoke the automatic citizenship of children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants, reigniting debates around the 14th Amendment.

The order, named "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship," marks the start of Trump's extensive plan for revising immigration policies and bolstering border security, as Fox News reports.

On Monday, Trump signed this order, marking a pivotal change in U.S. immigration policy. The order focuses on children born in the U.S. to parents who are in the country illegally and claims that these children should not automatically receive U.S. citizenship.

Legal Challenges and Controversy Expected

This move is expected to stir immediate legal challenges, mainly because it interprets the 14th Amendment in a controversial manner. Civil rights organizations and immigrant advocates are gearing up to contest the new directive, insisting that it contravenes established constitutional jurisprudence.

Many constitutional scholars argue that a change of this magnitude necessitates a constitutional amendment. They contend that an executive order cannot redefine established tenets of American citizenship law without going through the official legislative amendment process.

Conversely, some of Trump's advisors and legal scholars with conservative leanings believe that the traditional understanding of the amendment has long been misapplied. They argue that the 14th Amendment does not, in fact, grant citizenship under the stated conditions.

Executive Orders Begin to Flow

Alongside this, Trump has issued a suite of additional executive orders to maintain border security and tackle the issue of illegal immigration. On his first day back in office, he also declared a national border emergency.

Among these orders was one to resume the construction of the border wall, a hallmark policy of Trump's former administration. The controversial project was halted by his successor, drawing criticism from border security advocates.

Furthermore, the administration scaled back the functionality of the CBP One app by Monday afternoon. This app, used previously to facilitate border crossings and asylum processing, had been a tool in managing U.S. immigration flow.

Additional Moves Mark New Approach

Trump's orders also included deploying U.S. military forces to both the southern and northern borders, coordinated under U.S. Northern Command. This military deployment extends the government's reach in handling border scenarios.

In another significant move, Trump labeled certain international cartels and organizations as Foreign Terrorist Organizations and Specially Designated Global Terrorists. This designation seeks to escalate the response to criminal networks perceived as threats to national security.

The current administration aims to suspend refugee resettlement processes for four months. This pause in admissions applies to all new refugees entering through the existing resettlement infrastructure, causing concern among advocacy groups.

Tough Stance Unfolds

Furthermore, Trump's order outlines an immediate removal policy for migrants, effectively terminating the possibility of asylum claims. The policy underscores the administration's commitment to curtailing extended immigration proceedings.

In conjunction with these measures, Trump mandated that the attorney general pursue capital punishment where applicable. This includes targeting law enforcement murders and serious offenses committed by those unlawfully residing in the country.

While the unfolding set of orders underscores Trump's commitment to a hardened stance on immigration, legal and public discourse continues to simmer. Critics assert that achieving these changes through executive power challenges constitutional checks.

Debates About Constitutional Amendments Emerge

The executive order has already ignited passionate discussions about the need for a constitutional amendment rather than a presidential directive. Many observe this as a test of the balance between branches of government and the true extent of executive power.

With legal challenges on the horizon, the administration prepares to defend its decision in court. Attorney General appointments and legal teams foresee lengthy litigation in addressing these broad-reaching policy shifts.

This development has precipitated a turbulent wave in political and legal landscapes, as the future implications of these orders remain uncertain. Stakeholders from all sides brace for the forthcoming legal debates regarding this executive order's validity.

As the government maneuvers through implementation, the impacts of these decisions will unfold in courts and communities nationwide. The order promises to shape the national conversation on immigration and citizenship for the foreseeable future.