Trump is trying to eliminate Birthright Citizenship rights as granted by the 14th Amendment

apdst said:

DACA was an unconstitutional executive action. The subject is "unconstitutional executive actions". Yes?

There are a lot of people on the Left who support DACA. Some know it's unconstitutional and support it, anyway. Some think it's constitutional. In a few minutes someone will erroneously claim that it was ruled constitutional by the court, so be ready for that.

It's funny how The Constitution, in this case, is absolute and not open to interpretation, and "original intent" won't apply.

Click to expand...

to date, DACA has passed several SC challenges. If the SC has ruled in favor of DACA provisions, that has to mean DACA is constitutional.

How can the SC rule for DACA provisions and DACA be unconstitutional.

joko104 said:

Certainly the Democratic Party and liberals want birthright citizenship to be abolished so the USA can be like those utopian socialist European countries.

Click to expand...

These ‘birthrighters' are a present and future benefit to the Democratic Party that built and maintains our mammoth welfare state, and which, in
presidential elections, routinely wins 70 to 90 percent of the votes of people whose trace their ancestry to Asia, Africa and Latin America.

1751Texan said:

to date, DACA has passed several SC challenges. If the SC has ruled in favor of DACA provisions, that has to mean DACA is constitutional.

How can the SC rule for DACA provisions and DACA be unconstitutional.

Click to expand...

DACA has been ruled on by The Supreme Court?

slick said:

The overwhelming majority of the world’s countries do not offer automatic citizenship to everyone born within their borders.

Click to expand...

Our Constitution is quite clear from the very first sentence - if you're born here, you're a citizen.

Don't like that? Then why don't you move to one of those countries that aren't like that?

Spartacus FPV said:

When Senator Jacob Howard drafted the 14th Amendment, he explained its intent by stating:



There is no contradiction between being a strict constitutionalist and supporting this. Nor does supporting as much make one a "White Supremacist."

The fact that you irresponsibly throw that term around at ALL members of the GOP, goes hand and hand with your ignorance of all things Constitutional.

Click to expand...

Funny how "ambassadors" became the only exception allowed. Which means the rest of Howard's exceptions language GOT EXPLICITLY REJECTED. Which shows that you're not ignorant, but rather maliciously dishonest.

DamnYankee said:

The 14th Amendment was never designed to make illegals citizens.

Click to expand...

Yes it was, the language designed to make illegals an exception was specifically removed. So the right wing dirtbags will first get shut down by a federa judge, and then probably Kavanaugh will be the LONE yes vote to support Trump.

White America will lose and the inbred right wingers and their militia goon gamer boys will raise their guns in protest but that'll be the end of that.

Children born here to undocumented immigrants are under U.S. jurisdiction. So they are citizens, by our Constitution. Trump can't take that away from them.


Here's a tangent ... I have seen it argued that a Native American might not qualify as a natural born citizen and might thus not be qualified to run for president. The 14th amendment was not originally applied to them. The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 gives them full American citizenship but if they are born under tribal jurisdiction are they "natural born"? Maybe this IS settled, but something I read back when Ted Cruz was running for president suggested it wasn't settled. (And Ted Cruz's status as "natural born" wasn't settled.)

No presidential Executive Order can end birthright citizenship. Amending the Constitution would be required.

Zalatix said:

Funny how "ambassadors" became the only exception allowed. Which means the rest of Howard's exceptions language GOT EXPLICITLY REJECTED. Which shows that you're not ignorant, but rather maliciously dishonest.

Click to expand...

What are you talking about? There are many exceptions when it comes to being "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" like the children of Diplomats born here for example.

I may be wrong, but I'm no liar. But calling me one without basis means I can rightly disregard anything you have to say, you ****ing socialist. You and anything you have to say are now dismissed.