Trump Vows to End Birthright Citizenship

So if one of your ancestors swam the Rio Grande to enter the US you would have no problem with you and any children of your being deported?

I would have no problem with being send to England but I assume that not everyone would be that lucky.

 

Trump tries to take citizenship away from millions of Americans, and all bets are off.

civil war here we come

 

“And subject to the jurisdiction of”

This could go either way

 

So the court would be saying “Yesterday, person A born in the US to an illegal was per the Constitution a US citizen, but today they are not per the Constitution a US citizen even though we are ruling about an entire portion of the Constitution that has been in place for more than a century”?

That’s specious logic at best.

 

You realize that the 14th then also didn't recognize Native Americans, right? That had to be added by court decision. The phrase in question is, "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". The phrase does not include aliens, not resident, diplomats (for obvious reasons) visitors, etc.

The only place where being an illegal alien and transferring US citizenship exists was within the footnote that Justice Brennan inserted into one of the cases before the SCOTUS. It is likely that if you review legislative intent, there still has not been a single piece of legislation that supports the Brennan choice. So, it makes perfect sense that the EO once signed will be legally challenged, and fast tracked for adjudication by the SCOTUS. I expect that the footnote will be undermined, and thrown out.

There is literally no reason that the US would confer citizenship on anyone who isn't either a citizen of, or a legal resident of this country. If you cannot be here legally, you cannot convey this privilege to your illegal offspring.

 

If illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, then they cannot be charged with and prosecuted by courts in the United States.

 

The 14th Amendment was intended to make black people citizens. As usual the dummy who wrote it screwed up the language and left it wide open to all sorts of interpretations. Then in the late 1890s the racists on the SCOTUS extended it to the Chinese while denying black people the rights and privileges of citizenship.

 

Hate to break it to you but mentally I'll individuals are not allowed to own automatic weapons and in fact anyone wanting to own one has to go over multiple hurdles

 

illegal aliens, tourists, and other foreigners in the USA are charged with state and federal crimes all the time.

they are under Federal, state and local jurisdiction

the ONLY persons who are not, are those with diplomatic immunity

 

You’ll have to show where WKA decision mentions anything about illegal immigrants. It repeatedly refers to Wong’s LEGAL parents....

So which case was that?

 

You and MTLegal are entitled to you opinion

And I have mine

But we all have to wait to see what the unelected demigods on the SC say it means

 

I dont think the change will be retroactive

 

The lefts only recourse on repealing this outdated amendment is to go to the absurd. This is about stopping future illegal immigration in order to have anchor babies and nothing else.

 

WKA decided those are citizens. Their parents were here legally. It’s the parents that aren’t here legally that is the issue.

 

Well said

 

In 1982, Justice Brennan slipped a footnote into his 5-4 opinion in Plyler v. Doe, asserting that “no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment ‘jurisdiction’ can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful.”

 

The 14th Amendment was intended to give black people citizenship. It never applied to Indians. Most Indians didnt become American citizens until 1924 by an act of Congress and it was after WWII before they all became citizens.

 

Are your packing your bags or have your already done the in depth research needed to feel secure that all your ancestors had obey US immigration laws to the letter for many generations in the past?

As this nation is giving every indication of going down the toilet I would love to be deported to England myself.

 

I am so happy that trump won the 2016 election

And thos is just another example of why it was sich a good thing

 

More than 1/4. Nice try

 

Likely true statement. Perhaps their dubious parents should have considered that prior to their illegally gaining entry in this country.

To put a super fine point on this, do you then expect that if you were illegally in France that the offspring that you produced in France would be French citizens? I doubt it. Literally, no nation on the planet confers citizenship this way. If you aren't a citizen, or at least a resident alien of that nation, why do you suppose you suddenly get to be one of that nations' citizens?

 

That's not what I wrote.

I wrote that citizens of other countries are subject to the jurisdiction of that country, not the US. While they are in the US, they are most certainly to abide by the local, state, and federal laws of the US.

For example, if Honduras sought to extradite a Honduran citizen living illegally in the US, would that Honduran citizen be required to go? I get they could refuse and claim all sorts of things to avoid being extradited, but as a Citizen of Honduras could they be extradited?

If a person living illegally in the US was required to serve a period of conscription in their Native country, could that Native be found guilty of desertion, and if they ever return, be jailed?

 

And always subject to change ... though not nearly all 16 blue states are sanctuary states are they?

 

Then of course there are the millions of people who are in the US entirely legally but who just don't happen to be citizens (yet).

It will be interesting to see how President Trump's EO proposes to assign citizenship. Do parents have to show that they are US citizens when they register the birth of their child. If so, how ? It's easy in relatively cosmopolitan areas where people have passports and so on, but in very rural mid-America ?

Do both parents have to be citizens ?

What about edge cases like the child borne by a US citizen surrogate where the to-be parents are non-citizens ? Will that child be a citizen until the adoption goes through, and then be stateless thereafter.

Or could it just be that the President is saying stuff with no real consideration for the complexities and consequences (like "who knew healthcare could be so complicated ?" )

 

So the term "slipped a footnote in" is exactly the correct lens. His illegal action shouldn't be the basis of the conundrum we now find ourselves in. The EO should immediately countermand this illegal action.