By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Trump Plans to Challenge the Constitutional Definition of Birthright Citizenship

Zucas on 01 November 2018
o_O.Q said:
Zucas said:

Oh you don't need to comment on anything in those posts. Nothing in there is legally sufficient or shows any understanding of how the courts interpret the Constitution. Neither the poster or the writer of those articles should be doing any homework for anyone about these issues. 

As a note, this is not really about due process. Just that the type of issue that would be brought up has relatively little legal history. It's quite possible the SC wouldn't even take the case because of past court precedent. There isn't much legal scholarship suggesting that the 14th Amendment doesn't encapsulate birthright citizenship. The argument the court would possibly take on is whether or not "subject to the jurisdiction of" covers those that enter illegally. I don't think that argument has too much weight though because no one would suggest that if someone illegally entered and committed a crime, that the US wouldn't have jurisdiction to prosecute. TBH that statement was mainly meant to say that foreign diplomats and indigenous tribes were not covered by this. While being within the physical jurisdiction of the US, they were subject to other powers. 

 

so why do you think the article was made?

My apologies but I'm not sure what article? These links that the poster referenced? Or do you mean the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment? 



Around the Network
pastro243 on 01 November 2018
melbye said:
Wyrdness said:

Being born somewhere still means you have a connection to that place more so than any other place at that moment that's still a contradiction.

I think they should get the citizenship to the country the parents belong to.

They can have both 

ius soli and ius sanguinis are not opposites anyway, a lot of countries, mostly american countries, recognize both as methods of acquiring  nationality in their constitutions. 



- Our album on spotify https://open.spotify.com/album/56mEbEgyBYGzcDyZ1eMQ1v?si=hYKgir5YRSCrzywgGmV4oQ

- Our videoclip 

- My manga: https://www.webtoons.com/en/challenge/blanca-the-world/list?title_no=313068

Jumpin on 01 November 2018
Mr Puggsly said:
sundin13 said:
Who needs the Constitution, right? Burn it all (except for the second amendment).

Well dems hate the first and second.

I can't imagine the left will complain given how much they complain about the constitution. Its just a document written by old white men.

Name one Democratic party politician who says they hate the first and second amendments.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

o_O.Q on 02 November 2018
Machiavellian said:
o_O.Q said:
"My question, what are people thoughts on this current move by President Trump."

what move? what steps has he taken to do this?

The act of making this announcement at this particular point in time and saying he will do something is a move.  Is he just giving his base red meat, does he really believe or willing to remove Birthright Citizenship with an Executive Order, is it a bluff who the hell knows but one thing for sure, the timing suggest he believes it benefit him and the GOP.

"The act of making this announcement at this particular point in time and saying he will do something is a move."

even though he hasn't actually done anything?



couchmonkey on 02 November 2018
o_O.Q said:
Machiavellian said:

The act of making this announcement at this particular point in time and saying he will do something is a move.  Is he just giving his base red meat, does he really believe or willing to remove Birthright Citizenship with an Executive Order, is it a bluff who the hell knows but one thing for sure, the timing suggest he believes it benefit him and the GOP.

"The act of making this announcement at this particular point in time and saying he will do something is a move."

even though he hasn't actually done anything?

I believe he will eventually do something about it, but not by executive order.  The whole thing is a show to focus the voting base on this topic instead of the meat of who to vote for, even CNN realozes it, but they can't stop reporting on the guy.

If you uderstand Trump, then you realize his first offer is never his final offer, so I doubt the executive order comment will bother his supporters, tho maybe a negative effect on undecideds who really care about politics.

n

ddd



Around the Network
RaptorChrist on 02 November 2018

God forbid anything get accomplished in a reasonable amount of time.



Torillian on 02 November 2018
RaptorChrist said:
God forbid anything get accomplished in a reasonable amount of time.

If you want to make the argument that expediency is more important than rule of law I think you're going to have a lot of issues. 



...

Machiavellian on 02 November 2018
o_O.Q said:
Machiavellian said:

The act of making this announcement at this particular point in time and saying he will do something is a move.  Is he just giving his base red meat, does he really believe or willing to remove Birthright Citizenship with an Executive Order, is it a bluff who the hell knows but one thing for sure, the timing suggest he believes it benefit him and the GOP.

"The act of making this announcement at this particular point in time and saying he will do something is a move."

even though he hasn't actually done anything?

Do you really believe he actually has to do something for it to not be a move.  Do you think politics is so black and white that the threat of something cannot be just as effective as actual action.  Remember this is before elections as he drums up support.  After the elections who knows if he will do anything.  Is this any difference between a campaign promise for votes before you get into office.  

Last edited by Machiavellian - on 02 November 2018

Soundwave on 02 November 2018
Machiavellian said:
o_O.Q said:

"The act of making this announcement at this particular point in time and saying he will do something is a move."

even though he hasn't actually done anything?

Do you really believe he actually has to do something for it to not be a move.  Do you think politics is so black and white that the threat of something cannot be just as effective as actual action.  Remember this is before elections as he drums up support.  After the elections who knows if he will do anything.  Is this any difference between a campaign promise for votes before you get into office.  

So more bullshit from the bullshit master basically. 



Ljink96 on 02 November 2018

lol, what a dumbass.