President Trump set the news cycle ablaze by announcing his intention to sign an executive order banning the concept of “birthright citizenship.” And while the liberal media scrambles to smear this latest move to slash the main incentive for illegal immigrants to come to America, Rush Limbaugh actually provided an eye-opening account on why birthright citizenship is mistakenly read into the intention of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. (RELATED: President Trump to Sign Executive Order Eliminating Birthright Citizenship.)

Basically, Rush already got the jump on the liberals who are just now rediscovering their love of the Constitution. The question now becomes, who do you trust more on the founding document of our land: Rush Limbaugh, proven conservative, or liberals who think the Second Amendment is a dead letter?

Back in 2015, Limbaugh took a call from a man named Dan who lived South Padre Island, Texas. Dan told Rush, in reaction to something Univision anchor Jorge Ramos said, “You cannot change the 14th Amendment. You can’t send 11 million people home. You can’t build this big old wall, and the Latin vote is something you need.”

Rush pushed Dan to explain himself, asking, “What’s the 14th Amendment got to do with anything?”

Dan sputtered some answer about changing “the amendment so that people who are born here cannot get citizenship,” referencing the 14th Amendment and its granting of birthright citizenship.

That’s when Rush took him to task, explaining first that “there’s nothing in the Constitution that says that if you are born to an illegal immigrant in America, that you are an American citizen. It’s not there. People think it is.”

What the 14th Amendment actually means

Rush went on:

There’s not even a Supreme Court decision that says that if you are born to an illegal, you’re an automatic citizen. And there shouldn’t be. I mean, that’s why the term “anchor baby” has been created, ’cause we’re making it happen. We it it’s it happened to be an addendum to a Supreme Court decision, was added by Justice William Brennan. It’s not even in the Constitution.

Then El Rushbo gave a brief history lesson:

Here’s what the guy who wrote the 14th Amendment wrote a few years later. He said, “Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is, by virtue of natural law and national law, a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens…” The 14th Amendment says the exact opposite. That’s what the guy who wrote the amendment says a few years later

“This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors…” My God, if that were…? (scoffs) It’d be a way to take over the country, if that were true. The man who authored the 14th Amendment was Senator Jacob Howard, and he wrote the above in 1866.

Journalist Jack Posobiec provided the transcripts of the debate over the 14th Amendment, which bolsters Rush’s point:

There you have it. The author of the 14th Amendment didn’t mean for it to be used in the way it is today, with illegals entering our country to give birth to babies who are automatically granted citizenship. That kind of policy creates the wrong incentive and makes a mockery of citizenship, which is about more than just being born in a specific location.

However – and this is a big however – the plain reading of the 14th Amendment is at odds with Limbaugh’s interpretation. That means Trump’s executive order will be challenged in court immediately.

All this means one thing: the debate over birthright citizenship is just beginning.