Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Manwon Lender

Trump may target birthright Citizenship holde

30 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Manwon Lender

President Donald Trump is considering an executive action to target birthright citizenship in his final weeks in office, according to two sources who spoke with The Hill in a report published on Friday.

Birthright citizenship is the policy whereby anyone who is born in the US is immediately granted citizenship, regardless of whether their parents have citizenship or not.

It's guaranteed under the 14th Amendment, which states in part 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." More than 30 countries — mostly in the Western Hemisphere — have birthright citizenship. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-considering-order-to-target-birthright-citizenship-in-last-weeks-2020-11

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-considers-targeting-birthright-citizenship-with-executive-order-in-his-last-weeks-in-office-report-says/ar-BB1beqxi 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rashore

He can try an order, but it would be fairly pointless. It takes majority house and senate approval as well as 3/4 majority of the states to ratify it to make an amendment happen. There's still a few almost amendments out there that made it off the hill and didn't get ratified by the states so never made it to become an actual amendment. It took a couple years to get the 14th through the process, I doubt it will get overturned by an order within a couple months.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
38 minutes ago, rashore said:

He can try an order, but it would be fairly pointless. It takes majority house and senate approval as well as 3/4 majority of the states to ratify it to make an amendment happen. There's still a few almost amendments out there that made it off the hill and didn't get ratified by the states so never made it to become an actual amendment. It took a couple years to get the 14th through the process, I doubt it will get overturned by an order within a couple months.

I know your right, but its the point of why he is doing in the first place, I suspect he is just being Trump!! The guy is intentionally leaving a mess in his wake, he is the most verdictive person we have ever had in the White House in its history. Everything he is doing right now from replacing our Top National Security Officials to replacing our Top Military Civilian Officials and then replacing them with unqualified and in some cases people with a racist History is designed to create chaos for the incoming Biden Administration.

But the reason he is acting on these Birthright Citizens is more of the same, he is trying to cause our incoming Vice President Kamala Harris to become angry, you see she is a Birthright Citizen herself, and sadly any little dig he can make gives him some sort of sick pleasure, it is really sad and pathetic.

Thanks for your coments.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buzz_Light_Year

Brilliant move on Trump's part as the 14th Amendment needs to heard by SCOTUS to make a final determination once and for all as SCOTUS has never officially ruled on the first sentence "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."

Congress can not overturn an EO but someone with standing can sue which in turn will lead to the SCOTUS hearing the case.

You can find past court opinions on the 14th Amendment here.

https://www.numbersusa.com/news/supreme-court-opinions-about-birthright-citizenship-and-14th-amendment

As far as my own opinion Illegals that have babies in the U.S. are not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. as the word Illegal denotes that they are still under the jurisdiction of their country of origin and furthermore they are subject to deportation back to their country of origin.

Edited by Buzz_Light_Year
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek

even thou he has a right idea, i would not touch amendments,   pass a law limiting , restricting birch citizenship , just like numerous restrictions\bans they passed on guns, apparently do not vallate 2nd amendment,  so same measures need to be taken in regards to citizenship tourism. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
South Alabam

It sets up a really dangerous precedent. An executive order to nullify a constitutional right.

In that regards Joe Biden or any President afterwards could sign an executive order nullifying the second amendment, or any other rights.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RAyMO

Why doesn't he just issue an executive order changing whichever part of the constitution states that there have to be elections for the president? 

Or the part that allows individuals and media to criticise Presidents?

Edited by RAyMO
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor

It won't fly.  It's just like signing an executive order banning all guns on his last day.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
10 minutes ago, South Alabam said:

It sets up a really dangerous precedent. An executive order to nullify a constitutional right.

In that regards Joe Biden or any President afterwards could sign an executive order nullifying the second amendment, or any other rights.

naw, a potus can't do ti, if they could Obama would have done it long time ago

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buzz_Light_Year
10 minutes ago, South Alabam said:

It sets up a really dangerous precedent. An executive order to nullify a constitutional right.

In that regards Joe Biden or any President afterwards could sign an executive order nullifying the second amendment, or any other rights.

Apples and Oranges. SCOTUS decision in Heller established the 2nd Amendment once and for all yet laid out the possibility for gun regulation. It has yet to be established by the court whether anchor babies getting citizenship is within the scope of the 14th Amendment which was drafted for freed slaves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor

Just out of curiosity-  Where in the Constitution does it say you get citizenship because your parents are American?  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
South Alabam
Just now, Gromdor said:

Just out of curiosity-  Where in the Constitution does it say you get citizenship because your parents are American?  

Even American Indians didn't get citizenship because they were consider subject to the nation tribes they belonged to.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
Just now, South Alabam said:

Even American Indians didn't get citizenship because they were consider subject to the nation tribes they belonged to.

Well, that's just it.  As far as I know the only thing that defines citizenship is the 14th amendment.  Without it, I see no Constitutional basis for any American to have citizenship....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek

good point, 14th does not say anything about birth right. citizenship, it is NOT a constitutional right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buzz_Light_Year
6 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Well, that's just it.  As far as I know the only thing that defines citizenship is the 14th amendment.  Without it, I see no Constitutional basis for any American to have citizenship....

https://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/

Quote

The Constitution directly addresses the minimum qualifications necessary to serve as President. In addition to requiring thirty-five years of age and fourteen years of residency, the Constitution limits the presidency to “a natural born Citizen.”1. U.S. Const. art. II, § 1, cl. 5. All the sources routinely used to interpret the Constitution confirm that the phrase “natural born Citizen” has a specific meaning: namely, someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding at some later time. And Congress has made equally clear from the time of the framing of the Constitution to the current day that, subject to certain residency requirements on the parents, someone born to a U.S. citizen parent generally becomes a U.S. citizen without regard to whether the birth takes place in Canada, the Canal Zone, or the continental United States.

 

Edited by Buzz_Light_Year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
1 minute ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

Oh, it's true that we have passed laws regarding citizenship, but you forget the basis of the laws is the Constitution.  Strip the Constitutional basis away from the law and the law has no footing.  The 14th amendment is the only Constitutional thing defining your citizenship.  It's off that foundation that you are defined as an American.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buzz_Light_Year
5 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Oh, it's true that we have passed laws regarding citizenship, but you forget the basis of the laws is the Constitution.  Strip the Constitutional basis away from the law and the law has no footing.  The 14th amendment is the only Constitutional thing defining your citizenship.  It's off that foundation that you are defined as an American.   

No.

Long before the 14th Amendment it was understood who were citizens of the U.S.

Article II Section I.

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Autochthon1990

Donald Trump is molesting the constitution again? Color me shocked...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buzz_Light_Year
2 minutes ago, Autochthon1990 said:

Donald Trump is molesting the constitution again? Color me shocked...

No! He going to force a ruling on the 14th Amendment which is long overdue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
1 minute ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

No.

Long before the 14th Amendment it was understood who were citizens of the U.S.

Article II Section I.

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

It is implied but not defined.  (Technically none of us were citizens at the time of the adoption of this Constitution btw- because we weren't even born yet.  So no one alive technically should be president.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buzz_Light_Year
12 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

It is implied but not defined.  (Technically none of us were citizens at the time of the adoption of this Constitution btw- because we weren't even born yet.  So no one alive technically should be president.)

Well if the eligibility requirement for president at the time was to be a citizen then by whatever qualification that citizenship was arrived at would also apply for those who came after.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
20 hours ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

Brilliant move on Trump's part as the 14th Amendment needs to heard by SCOTUS to make a final determination once and for all as SCOTUS has never officially ruled on the first sentence "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."

Congress can not overturn an EO but someone with standing can sue which in turn will lead to the SCOTUS hearing the case.

You can find past court opinions on the 14th Amendment here.

https://www.numbersusa.com/news/supreme-court-opinions-about-birthright-citizenship-and-14th-amendment

As far as my own opinion Illegals that have babies in the U.S. are not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. as the word Illegal denotes that they are still under the jurisdiction of their country of origin and furthermore they are subject to deportation back to their country of origin.

Well actually it is not that Brilliant, I doubt it will be heard by the Supreme Court before he gone!!

It actually make sense that he starts think about the following.

 

Edited by Manwon Lender

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buzz_Light_Year
3 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

Well actually it is not that Brilliant, I doubt it hear by the Supreme Court before he gone!!

It actually make sense that he starts think about the following.

 

Irrelevant!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
14 minutes ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

Irrelevant!

Oh come on Buzz, wherecis your sense of humor!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
godnodog
19 hours ago, aztek said:

naw, a potus can't do ti, if they could Obama would have done it long time ago

suuuurrreeeeee, Obama that great threath to Murica, 

djisas craist Asstec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.