UC Irvine’s School of Social Sciences and Department of Political Science hosted a pop-up panel about President Donald Trump’s executive order striking down birthright citizenship in the United States on Feb. 3.
The panel featured Louis DeSipio, professor of Chicano/Latino studies and political science; Stephen Lee, professor of law; and Claire Kim, professor of political science and Asian American studies. The panelists encouraged students to ask their questions about the new executive order.
Third-year biomedical engineering student Valerie Padilla attended the event.
“Both of my parents are immigrants, so my mom is really worried about, like, everything going on with the executive order, so I took the chance to come to this panel,” Padilla told New University. “I didn’t realize how uninformed I was until I came to the panel.”
Birthright citizenship is a legal term which refers to the act of granting automatic citizenship to persons born in the United States. During his first day in office, Trump moved to revoke birthright citizenship for immigrants regardless of their current immigration status with its implementation starting Feb. 19. The order ruled that the parent’s immigration status during a person’s birth must determine the person’s citizenship.
However, the order was temporarily blocked on Jan. 23 and a U.S. judge ruled that birthright citizenship is protected under the 14th amendment. According to Lee, removing birthright citizenship would have created a new rule in immigration law.
“So, like, what that effectively means is that migrants can come here, they can work, but their family members will no longer get the benefits of inclusion and future generations,” Lee said during the panel. “Instead, they’re simply here as a form of labor extraction and exploitation.”
Students asked questions about how ending birthright citizenship might affect immigration globally. According to Lee, this executive order is ultimately meant to divert attention away from other arenas of government. Similarly, Kim found that the order builds a narrative more than it proposes a plan.
“They are making moves to indicate that’s the kind of society that they have in mind,” Kim said during the panel. “And that’s what birthright citizenship is ultimately about, you know, creating, preserving what they see as an omniscient white core, creating a second class of citizens.”
Students asked Lee what advice he may give to any law students navigating these political uncertainties. He assures that, although the issue is overwhelming, small things can move society forward.
“Maybe in four years things will be different. Maybe one of the justices gets replaced. And you just try to think about things in those lines,” Lee said. “It’s just that the victory you’re looking for may not be the kind you see on TV.”
Students also asked the panelists what other areas are affected by the birthright citizenship order made by the Trump administration.
“There’s all sorts of ways that citizenship is losing meaning already. So, for example, the fact that you could be like racialized … and be a citizen, but still be asked for papers, and still have your mobility restricted,” Lee said. “I mean, that is a sort of degradation of citizenship.”
According to DeSipio, Trump’s homeland security advisor, Stephen Miller, plans to target legal immigration. The immigration efforts to deport legal immigrants would essentially take away resources needed to process immigrants seeking citizenship.
Students also wondered what UC Irvine plans to do to protect their students and faculty. Lee responded with reassurance that the California state attorney general is “pretty aggressive” in fighting the executive order. DeSipio assured that faculty has been given instruction on how to navigate ICE raids within the classroom, should the event occur.
Panelists quelled the worries that drove students to wonder whether their own citizenships may be revoked.
“Right now, that’s a position that can’t be taken away without due process,” Lee said. “In the future, people are just not going to want to trust the government at all. So, even if this moment of crisis dies down, are you going to trust this system that can just dial things up this quickly?”
The panel ended with a question that asked what citizens can do to contest the order, to which Lee suggested students spread information through social media posts and DeSipio introduced rebuilding the immigration coalition during midterm elections.
“I mean, the ‘65 Immigration Act was a remarkable cross-party alliance, maybe for the wrong reasons, maybe to meet the nation’s economic needs,” DeSipio said during the panel. “But nevertheless, it accomplished a great deal.”
College Democrats at UCI also provided their perspective on the removal of birthright citizenship.
“We at College Democrats think that this is just another trend of the Trump administration disregarding constitutional law and trying to ruin the foundations upon which our nation is built,” Aleksander Weihermuller — College Democrats at UCI advocacy director — told New University. “By ending birthright citizenship, [we] risk Democratic backsliding … honestly, this issue should not be partisan at all.”
College Republicans at UCI was unavailable to speak with New University about their perspective on the Trump administration’s executive order aiming to end birthright citizenship.
For more information on citizenship in the U.S., students can visit the UC Immigrant Legal Services Center on the UCI DREAM Center website.
Alyssa Villagonzalo is a Features Apprentice for the winter 2025 quarter. She can be reached at akvillag@uci.edu.
Edited by Sofia Feeney and Mia Noergaard.