Trump vows to end birthright citizenship if re-elected

[Xeuma]

Probably not 5 votes on the court to support this, but you know Alito and Thomas would be all for it.

No, I do not know that, and such comments only exemplify that the average person on the left has no mental model of how people on the right think, even when given access to innumerable writings showing how they think. Its quite honestly astonishing how little grasp y'all have on the conversation mindset with how much text is dedicated here to debunking/dismantling/bashing it.

If you want to argue Thomas and Alito have actual judicial philosophies in the face of the clear examples of them flip flopping on past positions in recent years in order to benefit the current republican positions you can be my guest

I won't argue for Alito, since he does appear to me as somewhat of a hack, but even his judicial philosophy is absolutely fascinating (e.g., he was the sole dissent on a case somewhat like Skokie v. National Socialists of American, if I think of it later I'll edit accordingly). Thomas, however, has a very idiomatic jkdicialism, but he follows it wherever it leads, and I'm not aware of any case where he strays from it. You have any examples?

EDIT: The case was Snyder v. Phelps, where Alito was the sole dissent. He would have awarded damages to the family of a dead solider whose funeral was picketed by the Westboro Baptist Church.

Well for starters Thomas ruled Trump didn’t need to for go through a disposition in relation to the Stormy trial when he was still president even though he said Bill Clinton had to for Monica

I don't recall this case, but any googling returns results for the documents seized from Mar-a-Lago. Can you link it?

[Ferguson97]

Birthright citizenship really needs to end. No other major developed country does it.

Not an argument.

Shouldn't we try and be better than the rest of the world? No other country has out freedom of speech protections, that doesn't mean we should try to be like everyone else.

[Pericles]

He proposes this every election year. He clearly thinks it's working, it riles up the base. It can't happen though and gets dropped once it has done its job for him.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

He won't win anyways as I keep saying

[All Along The Watchtower]

Will he also end the War on Christmas?

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Birthright citizenship really needs to end. No other major developed country does it.

Canada?

Also, other countries have jus soli with restrictions (UK, Ireland, Germany, Australia, New Zealand, etc).

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Every country in the Western Hemisphere - the New World - has jus soli.

[politicallefty]

I always thought this is one of the defining things that makes America, you know, America.

[Sirius_]

People who are born and raised here should be citizens, regardless of their parent's status. I don't see what's wrong with that. Being an American isn't about blood.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Every country in the Western Hemisphere - the New World - has jus soli.

Off the top of my head I was thinking "except Colombia" but actually, yes, Colombia has jus soli.
Though, interesting, it seems some Caribbean places don't...
Jus soli is a bit more complicated than that though. Pakistan has it...which is telling.

[politicallefty]

Every country in the Western Hemisphere - the New World - has jus soli.

Off the top of my head I was thinking "except Colombia" but actually, yes, Colombia has jus soli.
Though, interesting, it seems some Caribbean places don't...
Jus soli is a bit more complicated than that though. Pakistan has it...which is telling.

Jus soli was part of common law, so it makes sense when you look at any country that either is, or was influenced by, common law. New Zealand was one of the most recent countries to end unrestricted birthright citizenship, back in 2006. (NZ Labour is oddly quite restrictive for a centre-left party, though I think that particular law was a result of a deal with a more anti-immigrant party.) Looking at other countries that established restrictions, you have the UK (1983), Australia (1986), and Ireland (2005). India went from jus soli to requiring both parents to have legal status (one of which must be a citizen).

As for the countries that weren't influenced by common law in the Western Hemisphere, I have no idea what the history is there when it comes to this issue. I guess, as said above, it's the New World?

[Pouring Rain and Blairing Music]

I think the chances of anything like this actually happening without a broad bipartisan coalition are slim to none -- basically no one left or right questions that Wong Kim Ark was decided correctly. It might be a theoretically good issue to campaign on, though, since I think it would be sort of easy to demagogue about particular unpopular categories of birthright citizens (like the children of mothers participating in birth tourism), although this has become less of a problem since a 2020 statute. (Apparently, in the early 2010s, 70% of births in Saipan were to foreigners practicing birth tourism -- though there has been a crackdown since and this only added up to several hundred per year, which isn't exactly a flood. Of children with rich and Americophilic parents, so even if it were a flood it wouldn't exactly be the most threatening one ever.)

I could see it being an effective campaign to get the most hardcore people on the right, but at this point, I’d figure most of them already support Trump (or a few that hate him and wouldn’t be influenced by this).

Wong Kim Ark is one of those really feel good cases like Gideon v. Wainwright where the little guy fought the government and won.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Why do OP keep posting threads about Trump being reelected he isn't being reelected

"Trump vows to end birthright citizenship if re-elected"

This shouldn't even be a possibility.

Article II, Section 1.

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Trump is telling everyone that he is both ethically and legally unfit to be President. There is no excuse for the constant pretense otherwise. The party that still bows to him. The voters who will still vote for him. The news that covers him as anything other than a crook and liar. The wretched stains on humanity that serve him.

Our nation's inability to simply turn away from Donald Trump is far worse and far more damning than Donald Trump himself. That there's even a debate about the possibility that he could be nominated, again, is a sign that America is gravely ill.

[the artist formerly known as catmusic]

birthright citizenship is based, though. I got work opportunities in Canada because it extended to children of people born in Canada. My dad got work opportunities in the UK because of a Canadian-UK agreement. These are good things that open doors for people and grant them life opportunities they wouldn't otherwise get. Why would you deny that of people who genuinely have a connection to your country? Shouldn't we aim to take care of and grant things to people who were born or have family connections here? What happened to "taking care of our own" you know?

Obviously it won't just happen but I'm just saying this to point out to people.

[Dr. MB]

I read Bill Barr's book recently. Trump wanted to do an executive order to remove birthright citizenship. But the Office of Legal Counsel wrote an analysis that Trump couldn't do it by executive order, so Trump dropped it. Barr also personally explained to Trump that the proposed executive order would've raise difficult questions about people who were already born here to illegal immigrants or foreign nationals: do you rescind their citizenship (is that even possible)?

If Trump understood that he couldn't do it then, then why does he think he could do it in a 2nd term?

Birthright citizenship really needs to end. No other major developed country does it. But Congress has to pass another amendment to get rid of it

It’s really just a “new world” vs “old world” thing. Pretty much all of North and South America have it. Barely any countries in Africa, Asia, or Europe do. Which makes sense because 90% of people in the Americas ancestors came here as immigrants.

[ꙮ]

I read Bill Barr's book recently. Trump wanted to do an executive order to remove birthright citizenship. But the Office of Legal Counsel wrote an analysis that Trump couldn't do it by executive order, so Trump dropped it. Barr also personally explained to Trump that the proposed executive order would've raise difficult questions about people who were already born here to illegal immigrants or foreign nationals: do you rescind their citizenship (is that even possible)?

If Trump understood that he couldn't do it then, then why does he think he could do it in a 2nd term?

This is something I think people miss about a potential second Trump term, and why I think that outcome would obviously be worse than DeSantis winning. For all the crap that happened in Trump's first term, there were still multiple people "holding him back". His cabinet was packed with establishment types, a majority of the Republican legislators in House and Senate were "establishment" as well as all the party leadership. They still supported a lot of things I strongly oppose, but they held back Trump from his worst impulses and most government-breaking plans.

That's not going to be the case this time. He's going to have some nut like Kari Lake as VP, and a cabinet that isn't much better. With the passage of time, there are more and more "true believers" in the House GOP caucus. It was only 7/50 in the Senate, but a supermajority of 139/209 Republicans in the House voted to overturn the 2020 election on Jan 6 (keep in mind, these votes happened after the riot). There is going to be nobody to tell him that he can't do incredibly damaging things, so long as they are technically constitutional.

[Hammy]

I read Bill Barr's book recently. Trump wanted to do an executive order to remove birthright citizenship. But the Office of Legal Counsel wrote an analysis that Trump couldn't do it by executive order, so Trump dropped it. Barr also personally explained to Trump that the proposed executive order would've raise difficult questions about people who were already born here to illegal immigrants or foreign nationals: do you rescind their citizenship (is that even possible)?

If Trump understood that he couldn't do it then, then why does he think he could do it in a 2nd term?

This is something I think people miss about a potential second Trump term, and why I think that outcome would obviously be worse than DeSantis winning. For all the crap that happened in Trump's first term, there were still multiple people "holding him back". His cabinet was packed with establishment types, a majority of the Republican legislators in House and Senate were "establishment" as well as all the party leadership. They still supported a lot of things I strongly oppose, but they held back Trump from his worst impulses and most government-breaking plans.

That's not going to be the case this time. He's going to have some nut like Kari Lake as VP, and a cabinet that isn't much better. With the passage of time, there are more and more "true believers" in the House GOP caucus. It was only 7/50 in the Senate, but a supermajority of 139/209 Republicans in the House voted to overturn the 2020 election on Jan 6 (keep in mind, these votes happened after the riot). There is going to be nobody to tell him that he can't do incredibly damaging things, so long as they are technically constitutional.

You honestly think DeSantis won't do the same thing? Except in his case, even if there are people holding him back, he'll simply ignore them and do it anyway.

[Pres Mike]

Birthright citizenship really needs to end. No other major developed country does it. But Congress has to pass another amendment to get rid of it

Get tf out of here. This is straight out of the KKK/Neo Nazis playbook.

My father is an immigrant. My grandparents were immigrants. I am a PROUD AMERICAN because of BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP.

I am a teacher. I vote. I pay taxes. I plan to run for elected office. I thought about enlisting in the military at one point. I am more civic minded than most Americans. I know more about American government and history than most Americans.

I've reported your post for racism.

[Mercenary]

Dumb. Birthright citizenship is good. Anyone either born in the US or to at least one citizen parent should br a citizen. Additionally, anyone born a citizen should be elgiible to run for president and not whatever b.s. people push aboud needing to be born on US soil to two citizens or whatever. How can you live in the country of immigration and be anti immigration?

[TDAS04]

You don’t trump the Constitution, Trump.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Dumb. Birthright citizenship is good. Anyone either born in the US or to at least one citizen parent should br a citizen. Additionally, anyone born a citizen should be elgiible to run for president and not whatever b.s. people push aboud needing to be born on US soil to two citizens or whatever. How can you live in the country of immigration and be anti immigration?

I have no problem with unrestricted jus soli (birthright citizenship). However, I also don't oppose jus soli with restrictions like what the UK does.

Basically in the UK:

*You gain citizenship at birth if one of your parents is a British citizen.
*You can gain citizenship at the age of 10, regardless of your parents nationality, if you've lived in the UK primarily since birth.