| NightlyPoe said: I'd just like to back up and point out that the opening post and most of the posters in this thread are completely incorrect. Trump isn't trying to override the Constitution, he's saying that birthright citizenship isn't in there in the first place. Personally, I think that's a difficult argument to make, but it's not completely unreasonable given the history of the Amendment and what it was thought to mean at the time (originalism). My personal view is that it's good policy to end birthright citizenship as it's another magnet for illegal immigration, but that Trump is unlikely to prevail. But the idea that Trump is tossing the Constitution out is overwrought. He's applying a valid interpretation that hasn't been challenged. I'd also say that I'm highly skittish on changing major policies based on executive orders, but Trump's actually better about that than his predecessor. |
Bar our other conversation about procedure, this is really what I would want to discuss with you. In particular, I want to know what you think would be Trump's argument that birthright citizenship isn't in the 14th Amendment in light of the Wong Kim Ark case. You are one of the few that has said you think this is what he is arguing and I would be very curious to know your legal reasoning behind that, despite saying it is a difficult argument to make. Not trying to put you on the spot, my apologies, but frankly curious.
