It’s right on their web pages, under issues. Perhaps we should say it’s far right on their web pages.
We quote teh LNC Web Pages at LP.org.:
“To help balance the conflict between those who want migration freedom and those concerned about dangerous persons coming over, [Editor: Emphasis ours.] the Libertarian Party calls for an end to birthright citizenship and reformation of the citizenship process.
Citizenship should have a paid model in similar fashion to other countries with investment-based citizenship programs, such as in Greece, Malta, and Turkey. Those who don’t wish to become citizens, or who cannot afford the process yet, should be free to trade and travel within the country. However, if they commit a crime, they should face harsher sanctions with potential deportation to balance out their lack of citizenship status risk.”
And now the item that we quoted about birthright citizenship has disappeared from LP.org, the Libertarian National Committee’s web pages.
Always take a screenshot, George.
Especially when Angela McCardle is involved.
I heartily support this position.
The LP Twitter account clarifies that the LP is not calling for the end of birthright citizenship.
“There was a revision oversight on one of our new website “Issues” pages regarding birthright citizenship, which has been brought to our attention. While every topic is up for debate, the LP is not calling for an end to birthright citizenship.”
https://twitter.com/LPNational/status/1876654986744230338
How is such a “mistake” made? The article still goes against the platform by imposing a fee on immigrants. When will that be fixed? Who authorized that?
They oughr to advocate ending it since Birthright citizenship was only originally intended for those born in the country to American citizen parents.
Gotta protect special statist status right? How about end everyones citizenship who can trace their ancestors back to another country of origin? Or how about we make it so small and pointless it just doesn’t matter and people can quit pretending they are more special they any other meatbag on this doomed rock.
Everyone can trace their ancestry to another country, even if it was crossing a no longer existing land bridge during an ice age thousands of years ago. That’s a red herring. Destroying national sovereignty through birthright citizenship is an entirely different question. See discussion at
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2025/01/libertarian-party-retracts-birthright-citizenship-policy-update-citing-oversight/
If you are suggesting anarchy, the private property equivalent of birthright citizenship would lead to absurd outcomes, which is why private property owners, whether individual or joint at any scale, don’t have such rules on private property.
If you’re suggesting world government, that’s a very bad idea, for many reasons, but to take just one – most US citizens are in the global 1%. Allowing the whole human population of the “doomed rock” a potential vote (actual or de facto) on distribution of resources is unlikely to go well for the joint owners of the particular portion of it currently known as the United States of America.
You can have your discussion on whether, when or how to end “special statist status” at some point after you succeed at ending the welfare state. At that point we would still disagree, but it’s not even worth talking about unless and until you can at the very least do that much first.
Yes, they should, as soon as your party’s next national convention votes for the requisite platform change.
On the one hand, this is incrementally better and from my perspective more sane than the prior statement they had, although the Constitution Party’s platform plank on this issue is still much better. On the other hand, it does seem to exceed their authority to issue policy changes of this magnitude outside of conventions. Libertarians don’t actually all agree on anything at all, so they will naturally argue over every part of this.
We all agree that freedom and liberty is the answer.
No matter the question.
Libertarians are individualist by nature and reject all forms of collectivism.
That’s why getting us to agree on anything is like herding cats.
This is a good thing. The original and correct definition of Natural Born citizen is one born in the USA to American citizen parents. 14th amendment citizenship only applied to former black slaves. American Indians were not granted American citizenship until 1924 via an act of Congress.
Mass welfare statist immigration could be ended if the welfare spigot to foreign migrants was cut off and if it was made more difficult to become an American citizen. If these incentives were removed a lot of foreign migrants would stop coming here, and out of the ones who are here some of them would leave voluntarily if these policies were implemented.
A SCOTUS decision actually said that Amerindians were not under the jurisdiction of the US, so the 14th Amendment did not apply. It later ruled that children of legal aliens were under the jurisdiction of the US.
I am confused. Were these passed by the LP National Convention, or are they new statements by the LP National Committee?
They are statements by the LNC, not any platform changes or policy pronouncements made by the national convention.
So when are they going to put out their position on how tariffs are the best tool in the government? Or how Trump was actually right to ban bump stocks, or whatever the great pumpkin demands on his subjects.
LPHQ does not have authority to change policy.
Bravo! Finally, the LP has an issues page with actual policy positions relevant and easy to understand by the public.
As a first-generation immigrant, I have no problem with reconciling what is clearly a proposal to end the automatic citizenship granted by being born in US state or territory or a ship under a US flag. Citizenship is automatically granted in virtually every country to only anyone born of one parent who is already a citizen.
If successful, this policy would resolve a major justification for the creation of the Progressive Era’s massive bureaucracy which is border control and naturalization. Before the Progressive Era’s Ellis Island style federalization of ports of entry, the states managed ports of entry and made it so easy for entry that rarely did anyone try to come in a different way. Immigration was also faster and less costly.
Additionally, as a representative democracy, the United States citizen’s should be wary of who it grants voting rights to since voting decides directly and indirectly government attitudes toward personal and private property rights.
I also believe that these proposals are inline with our platform since the proposals if passed take the country in the direction of our aspirational goals as a political party.
These are issues, policies and proposals that should be decided at convention by the delegates.
Not by Angela.
So glad the Liberal Party USA is openly & unapologetically pro-immigration unlike every other political party including the LP – the LNC should be embarrassed to have this crap on their website!
If you’re sick of this MEGA Trump crap please join us: https://www.liberalpartyusa.org/
If the Liberal Party ever runs candidates for non-federal office in Florida, I’d be inclined to support those candidates.
Until it removes the giant military adventurism loopholes from its platform, no dice on Congress or the presidency, though.