jack t ripper wrote:Sadly, that is not a "policy".
That is the existing interpretation of the Constitution. Fortunately, the by far largest effect is in California, which hasn't voted Republican since Reagan. The electoral nightmare would be Texas.
I don’t have time to do a deep dive/research this right now but I think that you are correct.
How could this potentially be changed?
A) an attempted change in law (unlikely with a divided Congress right now) followed by challenges to such change in the courts. Even with a conservative leaning SCOTUS, a “favorable” SCOTUS decision would IMHO come across as “activist” meaning that it’s quite likely that even some of the conservative justices might not support it.
B) a challenge to the existing interpretation via a lawsuit and then that suit making its way through the courts to SCOTUS. the likely outcome being as I described in A)
C) a change via amendment to the US Constitution. Also very unlikely given that the members in Congress from left leaning/Democratic states would not support it AND the state legislatures from those states would also oppose it. Such an amendment would be characterized by some as being “anti-immigration” so there would be a lot of public angst/protests associated with such an amendment.
Given how difficult it is to amend the US Constitution (easier with widely supported ideas, difficult or near impossible with controversial ideas) a change via amendment would also seem stillborn.