Trump will announce end of birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants, officials say

[Auld Phart]

You haven’t actually read the constitution have you? Picking up right wing talking points you find on the Internet isnt going to help you here. Educate yourself. Parrots don’t sound smart

Parrots don’t sound smart

ironic

 

[IM2]

It is covered by the 14th Amendment. Most of these right-wingers don't know anything about the 14th Amendment or they would not use it to claim their equal protection is being misused in things like AA when they have the majority of everything.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

It is covered by the 14th Amendment. Most of these right-wingers don't know anything about the 14th Amendment or they would not use it to claim their equal protection is being misused in things like AA when they have the majority of everything.

The Democrats refuse to accept that everyone has civil rights.

 

[80zephyr]

No, they cannot without finding support for the new interpretation which does not exist. In other words, where else does it say that a child born to illegals here is not a US citizen at birth? That's been case law for 127 years.

Praying in school was the law of the land until the 1960's when the SCOTUS "discovered" that it wasn't.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

People use that same argument concerning the 2nd Amendment.

you do not know what you are talking about

 

[Tommy Tainant]

It’s not in the Constitution. The 14th amendment was for slaves.

This is the line in the constitution.

“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.”

It doesnt mention slaves, or immigrants no matter what you spout. I suspect that Trump would need to change that before he implements his edict.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

FACT:
The 14th Amendment Birth Right Citizenship was meant to protect the offspring of the newly freed Slaves.
I was never meant for people who illegally crossed our border.

It doesnt specify that.

 

[pknopp]

you do not know what you are talking about

And yet I do. But not being able to address my point, off you go.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Slick. (not really)

Ive not seen any other thread but then I havent really looked too hard. Merge as needed.

 

[Auld Phart]

Ive not seen any other thread but then I havent really looked too hard. Merge as needed.

it's been discussed several times in the years I've been here.

 

[johnwk]

Right there in provision A.

Quote the wording you are referring to by which Congress approved birthright citizenship to the offspring of an illegal entrant's child born on American soil.

 

[Darkwind]

It is covered by the 14th Amendment. Most of these right-wingers don't know anything about the 14th Amendment or they would not use it to claim their equal protection is being misused in things like AA when they have the majority of everything.

You've been schooled on the 14th so many times in the past year its becoming pathetic.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

it's been discussed several times in the years I've been here.

Then why do you continue to defend something that is unconstitutional ?

 

[Auld Phart]

Then why do you continue to defend something that is unconstitutional ?

take it to court, and see how THEY read it.

 

[johnwk]

No, they cannot without finding support for the new interpretation which does not exist. In other words, where else does it say that a child born to illegals here is not a US citizen at birth? That's been case law for 127 years.

Cite the case in which our courts were asked to decide if a child born on American soil to an illegal entrant foreign national is granted citizenship upon birth.

 

[Curried Goats]

Quote the wording you are referring to by which Congress approved birthright citizenship to the offspring of an illegal entrant's child born on American soil.

I did. Just because you won't accept it as such, emotionally, doesn't mean anything. You also won't find them specifically granting citizenship to redhead children, but like the child of illegals it's all covered by the wording of provision A.

 

[johnwk]

I did. Just because you won't accept it as such, emotionally, doesn't mean anything. You also won't find them specifically granting citizenship to redhead children, but like the child of illegals it's all covered by the wording of provision A.

Quote the wording you are referring to by which Congress approved birthright citizenship to the offspring of an illegal entrant's child born on American soil.

 

[Curried Goats]

Quote the wording you are referring to by which Congress approved birthright citizenship to the offspring of an illegal entrant's child born on American soil.

I did. The children of illegals are covered under provision A just like red headed children are whether you want to accept that emotionally or not.

 

[kyzr]

Not what you said, dumbass!
You said: The legislative intent is that citizens make citizens, non-citizens do not. Where did you get that?

The 14th Amendment is crystal clear. Born in the US equals US citizenship unless you are here as a representative of a foreign government, i.e. not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Try again.

In got that "intent" from Trump's EO.
I did not say the 14th's original intent.
The real question is "can the USSC re-interpret the 14th to agree with Trump's EO?"
Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett have been squishy, so its a crap-shoot which way they decide.

The problem to be solved is national security. The Russians and Chinese have a cottage industry bringing in pregnant women to have their "anchor babies" and then use them to flock to the US.

Russian 'birth tourists' are flocking to Miami, and Trump condos, to give birth to American citizens

The latest Speed Read,/speed-reads,,speed-reads, breaking news, comment, reviews and features from the experts at The Week

theweek.com

 

[Mac-7]

Agreed.

I don't think that any President has the authority to edit or alter a Constititional Amendment with just an EO/EA.
.

The Constitution means whatever 5 unelected fat ass SC judges say it means

They can rewrite the Constitution whenever they please