End of Birthright Citizenship
rickdugan
Verified and Certifiable Super-Reviewer
As many here know, one of the numerous executive orders Trump signed included an end to birthright citizenship. He is Obviously hoping to stop immigrants from coming here and having so-called "anchor babies."
IMO this was by far the most profound and controversial executive order he signed. Any woman hoping to have children here would need to seriously rethink that plan if the child could not enjoy the basic rights of U.S. citizenship.
It is also Unconstitutional. The Constitution provides that:
"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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The part pertaining to "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" has only been interpreted to exclude people who, for one reason or another, were exempt from some or all U.S. laws, which is definitely not the case for illegal immigrants.
This will never survive court challenge, but it will cause untold havoc while it works through the courts.
Also imagine the harm this would cause so many new babies born here. Right now we already have an estimated 3 million so-called "Dreamers" here in the U.S., who were minors when they were brought here by their parents and know little to nothing about the places they came from. How many more millions would grow up like this if this were upheld? The inhumanity is mind numbing. These are kids who grow up here, attend our schools and are fully Americanized, yet they cannot fully participate in the U.S. economy. This is truly a horrible purgatory to be stuck in.
IMO this was by far the most profound and controversial executive order he signed. Any woman hoping to have children here would need to seriously rethink that plan if the child could not enjoy the basic rights of U.S. citizenship.
It is also Unconstitutional. The Constitution provides that:
"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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The part pertaining to "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" has only been interpreted to exclude people who, for one reason or another, were exempt from some or all U.S. laws, which is definitely not the case for illegal immigrants.
This will never survive court challenge, but it will cause untold havoc while it works through the courts.
Also imagine the harm this would cause so many new babies born here. Right now we already have an estimated 3 million so-called "Dreamers" here in the U.S., who were minors when they were brought here by their parents and know little to nothing about the places they came from. How many more millions would grow up like this if this were upheld? The inhumanity is mind numbing. These are kids who grow up here, attend our schools and are fully Americanized, yet they cannot fully participate in the U.S. economy. This is truly a horrible purgatory to be stuck in.
31 comments
But I still think Trump took a maximalist position on illegal immigration in order to get bargained down. That's his MO. It's Jose the TdA gangster that most people care about, not Juan the landscaper. From a purely practical standpoint, deporting 12 million illegals is only slightly more feasible than confiscating half a billion guns.
Birthright citizenship was meant for one thing and one thing only: to make newly freed slaves, born in this country, citizens. Like everything else good, progressives took it, used people weaker than them as weapons and ruined it. Progressives love the Palestinians, because they use and abuse people the same way. The kids can stay, the parent have to go as they weren't bown here. In addition, asylum has to be ended. Make it fair and end it for all.
Normally I would agree, but I just don't see SCOTUS overturning this. We're talking about the children of people living and working here, whether the parents are citizens or not. The Founding Fathers made their intent in adopting this provision very clear in their deliberations, which included giving immigrants the opportunity to come here and bear children who would enjoy the privileges of citizenship.
In this case, the intent of the drafters was clear, as set forth in records of the deliberations. They actually knew that this could entice others to come here and give birth. Back then that was considered a positive outcome given how young the country was and how much more land we had to populate.
And there is ample case history as to why illegal immigrants are considered "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." After all, what federal laws are they exempt from? They can be prosecuted for breaking federal law just like anyone else who is here, except for official foreign diplomats and enemy occupiers (which do not have birthright citizenship).
I'm guessing that if this goes to SCOTUS, it comes out 7-2 or even 8-1 in favor of voiding this EO.
If Trump wants this to end, he'll need to get the ball rolling on a Constitutional Amendment. Good luck with that, lol.
Thge only Scotus Wong case I know of has zip to do with immigration and only ruled that the fruits of an illegal entry (verbal, drugs) could not be used in Court. Every Motion to supress ever filed cites it.
Trumps executive order will be overturned
It also bars insurrectionists. Insurrection supporters. From holding public office.
As for the 14th amendment, it has never been applied to every child born in the United States. For instance, children born to foreign diplomats that have been born in US hospitals have never been considered American citizens. That is because it was meant to solidify the Civil Rights Act of 1866 which granted citizenship to anyone born in the United States "not subject to any foreign power". The courts have held that children of foreign diplomats are subject to the foreign power of the country their parents are serving as diplomats for. The courts have also decided that children of foreign nationals born on military bases overseas and at US embassies in other countries (both of which are considered American soil) are not US citizens just because they were born on those types of US soil.
I suppose the courts could stretch those types of exemptions to apply to children born in the US where neither parent is lawfully in the country or just on a temporary visa by saying that the parents are subject to a foreign power. However, it would be quite a stretch especially if the parents claim that they renounced their citizenship to that foreign country by seeking refugee status by fleeing to the US.
It's going to be interesting to see how the courts handle this issue.
Open borders doesn't work. It's globalist propaganda you guys slurping up. Not every thing is about the cost of labour. Do you guys ever bring up healthcare costs, how about crime. Do you see the places this "immigration" is coming from. Then funny enough when they get here, wherever they goes turns into a mad max fucked up hellscape. The nature of third world immigration is you have to pay for it, dearly. Most of these folks will be going on the doll for the duration of their lifespans, you taxpayer get to pay for all of it. The liberal media ofcourse leaves all that part out.
We can be nice to our neighbors. Have respect for them. But everyone can't live our house. We have to boundaries and be able to say no.
We do need the workers. The UK is fucked up in too many ways to easily list, which is why this nonsense goes on there.
Right Gam, because that's been working out swimmingly so far.
And we sure as fuck do need the workers, and then some. Just imagine if Trump could actually deport several million illegals, who currently represent 5% of our workforce right now doing things that our kids don't want to do. We'd be screwed.
The second way, which never has and never will happen is for 2/3 (34) of the states to pass legislation demanding a constitutional convention. The reason it never happens, but has come close twice, is that once it starts they could theoretically agree to get rid of every single right under the Constitution and have the Presidenr and Congress be permitted to serve forever under the new Constitution.
If we want to change birthright citzenship is to pass regulations and legislation that harms every state that refuses to ratify the amendment.It works. Every state has a b.a.c limit for driving of no more than .08%. No federal law mandates it, whcih would be unconstitutional. All Highway and Transportation had to do to get every state (mine was the last with its 2/3 lawyers legislature) to sign on was pass a regulation stating that only states with a .o8 b.c.a law get matching highway funds. This is the way to get rid of birthright citizenship.
There has been a growing trend, especially amongst Asian and African visitors from Hong Kong, China, South Korea, Taiwan and Nigeria to the United States, to make use of "Birth Hotels" to secure US citizenship for their child and leave open the possibility of future immigration by the parents to the United States. Pregnant women typically spend around $20,000 to stay in the facilities during their final months of pregnancy and an additional month to recuperate and await their new baby's U.S. passport.