The writer of an op-ed published in Newsweek that questioned Kamala Harris’s citizenship praised the publication for standing by the article.
Dr. John C. Eastman, a law professor and former dean, wrote an op-ed for the publication on Wednesday in which he speculated that Harris might not be able to appear on the Democratic presidential ticket even though she was born in Oakland, California, because of her parents’ immigration status. Newsweek initially defended the story’s publication despite public outcry. It has since issued a statement apologizing for the controversy, but not the op-ed itself.
Eastman, in a phone interview with the Washington Examiner, stood by the op-ed and said it was “significant” that Newsweek has kept the story up on its website even with the editor’s note.
“Well, I don’t think they’re apologizing for the story. What I read into their second statement was that they apologized for not realizing that reaction that it might’ve triggered. Right? The fact that they’ve kept the story up, I think, is significant. The story is accurate. There’s not a single misstatement of fact, or of law in that opinion,” he said.
In the op-ed, Eastman’s argument rests on the language of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. The amendment says, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside,” and he focuses on the specific clause “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
He argues that the clause means that people who are not subject to the complete jurisdiction of the country are not citizens, which he says extends to their children even if they were born on U.S. soil. In the case of Harris, her parents were from Jamaica and India, and she was born in California, but according to Eastman, whether she’s a “natural-born citizen” remains unclear.
The law professor, who said he was surprised by the backlash that the op-ed created, also praised Newsweek for not caving to the criticism.
“The notion that we’re going to let scholarship on significant unresolved constitutional issues be driven by Twitter trolls is just preposterous. And yet that seems to be the kind of norm today,” Eastman added. “So I’m glad they’ve stood by it enough to keep it up. I certainly appreciated the editor’s note defending their decision to publish it in the first place. And even the apology comes along with the conclusion that says, ‘But we’re going to keep it up because it’s accurate.'”
Newsweek, in its second editor’s note, said the newsroom was “horrified” that the op-ed “gave rise to a wave of vile Birtherism directed at Senator Harris.”
The controvsery marked the second time in recent months that an op-ed received widespread condemnation. In June, Republican Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton published an op-ed in the New York Times calling for President Trump to deploy troops to U.S. cities to squash widespread protests, which had turned violent in some cases. The op-ed led to the resignation of James Bennet, the head of the opinion section.
