End of birthright citizenship?

Does donald trump's election mean the end of automatic citizenship for the children of illegals? He has majorities in both houses and in the judicial after he nominates scalias replacement. All he has to do is overcome a filibuster by democrats and proillegal republicans like rubio or do an executive order. -

He would have to convince the Supreme Court to overturn their rulings, which is really not going to happen, so no.

99percenter said:

Does donald trump's election mean the end of automatic citizenship for the children of illegals? He has majorities in both houses and in the judicial after he nominates scalias replacement. All he has to do is overcome a filibuster by democrats and proillegal republicans like rubio or do an executive order. -

Click to expand...

I don't know why.

No it will not end, but it will over time be more considered a gift which America offers rather than an entitlement.

I think he would need a SCOTUS ruling for this. But if a case were to reach them after he appoints his new justice, there's a chance that's what would happen.

Cephus said:

He would have to convince the Supreme Court to overturn their rulings, which is really not going to happen, so no.

Click to expand...

That is especially true, if the new Justice is conservative.

Anagram said:

I think he would need a SCOTUS ruling for this. But if a case were to reach them after he appoints his new justice, there's a chance that's what would happen.

Click to expand...

No, there really isn't. The SC has always been very hesitant to overturn previous rulings, especially long-standing previous rulings. The chances of this ever happening, without a really, really good reason, are somewhere between slim and none.

joG said:

That is especially true, if the new Justice is conservative.

Click to expand...

It doesn't really matter, unless the whole court falls apart and starts acting in a manner they have never, ever acted in before.

Hawkeye10 said:

No it will not end, but it will over time be more considered a gift which America offers rather than an entitlement.

Click to expand...

Which would be a pity. It has been one of the defining factors of American culture.

Cephus said:

No, there really isn't. The SC has always been very hesitant to overturn previous rulings, especially long-standing previous rulings. The chances of this ever happening, without a really, really good reason, are somewhere between slim and none.

Click to expand...

While that's true, they don't have a completely square ruling on this issue. While United States v. Wong Kim Ark implied that children of illegals are automatically citizens, that case was about children of legal immigrants. If the SCOTUS wanted to, it would be easy to distinguish from the prior case.

Anagram said:

While that's true, they don't have a completely square ruling on this issue. While United States v. Wong Kim Ark implied that children of illegals are automatically citizens, that case was about children of legal immigrants. If the SCOTUS wanted to, it would be easy to distinguish from the prior case.

Click to expand...

Except the Supreme Court has treated it as law since 1898. Every court system in the nation has ruled as though it were true for almost 120 years. Overturning that ruling would have such a ridiculously profound effect on American immigration law, I don't think either of us can imagine the ramifications if it actually happened. Nothing happens in a vacuum. It would be like dropping a nuke on American law, just like overturning Rowe vs. Wade would. That's why it will never, ever, ever happen.

joG said:

Which would be a pity. It has been one of the defining factors of American culture.

Click to expand...

What would be a pity?

America will still give the gift, we simply will demand that the recipients acknowledge that they are receiving a gift rather than in entitlement.

Seems fair to me.

99percenter said:

Does donald trump's election mean the end of automatic citizenship for the children of illegals? He has majorities in both houses and in the judicial after he nominates scalias replacement. All he has to do is overcome a filibuster by democrats and proillegal republicans like rubio or do an executive order. -

Click to expand...

I don't know whether that is on the to do list, but Lord I wish it was. We need to go to a system that only children born to U.S. citizens receive automatic citizenship.

Cephus said:

He would have to convince the Supreme Court to overturn their rulings, which is really not going to happen, so no.

Click to expand...

Agreed. We are talking about a matter of existing Supreme Court decision based on a challenge.

Meaning, for things to change we would need another law and another challenge... assuming Trump has a successful appointment (or two) before it gets there.

Cephus said:

Except the Supreme Court has treated it as law since 1898. Every court system in the nation has ruled as though it were true for almost 120 years. Overturning that ruling would have such a ridiculously profound effect on American immigration law, I don't think either of us can imagine the ramifications if it actually happened. Nothing happens in a vacuum. It would be like dropping a nuke on American law, just like overturning Rowe vs. Wade would. That's why it will never, ever, ever happen.

Click to expand...

I changed my mind. You're right. Even in Plyer v. Doe the four conservative dissenting justices agreed in dicta that the 14th granted birthright citizens to children of illegal immigrants.

99percenter said:

Does donald trump's election mean the end of automatic citizenship for the children of illegals? He has majorities in both houses and in the judicial after he nominates scalias replacement. All he has to do is overcome a filibuster by democrats and proillegal republicans like rubio or do an executive order. -

Click to expand...

All he has to do? You ,may want to check with the US Constitution, specifically Article V.

Anagram said:

I changed my mind. You're right. Even in Plyer v. Doe the four conservative dissenting justices agreed in dicta that the 14th granted birthright citizens to children of illegal immigrants.

Click to expand...

This whole "sky is falling" nonsense that we're seeing on the left is as absurd as the right thinking the world was going to end with Obama. Neither side has the IQ to think through what's actually likely.

Anagram said:

I changed my mind. You're right. Even in Plyer v. Doe the four conservative dissenting justices agreed in dicta that the 14th granted birthright citizens to children of illegal immigrants.

Click to expand...

American insanity on display for all to see. Among the developed countries, only Canada is equally stupid.

Giving a citizenship to a baby born to a tourist in transit is already crazy enough.

But to reward a baby of a criminal alien trespasser? Are you guys nuts?

Is this what the Constitution really means?

Congress can stop this bull**** tomorrow. All they have to do is pass a law stripping illegal offsprings of their right to become citizens and, at the same time, block the federal appeals courts from interfering with that law. Period.

With that prohibition in place, the Supremes will never be able to get any case challenging the law.

From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction_stripping

By exercising these powers in concert, Congress may effectively eliminate any judicial review of certain federal legislative or executive actions and of certain state actions...

So, the only question is if Congress will ever have the guts.

legalimmigrant said:

Congress can stop this bull**** tomorrow. All they have to do is pass a law stripping illegal offsprings of their right to become citizens and, at the same time, block the federal appeals courts from interfering with that law. Period.

With that prohibition in place, the Supremes will never be able to get any case challenging the law.

From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction_stripping

By exercising these powers in concert, Congress may effectively eliminate any judicial review of certain federal legislative or executive actions and of certain state actions...

So, the only question is if Congress will ever have the guts.

Click to expand...

But they can't because this is a Constitutional issue that has already been decided by the Supreme Court. The only ones who could overturn it are the Supreme Court and they're sure not going to do it.

Cephus said:

But they can't because this is a Constitutional issue that has already been decided by the Supreme Court. The only ones who could overturn it are the Supreme Court and they're sure not going to do it.

Click to expand...

Congress can do many things without directly confronting the SC. Like speeding up deportations of illegals and their "American" offsprings. 18 years later, the offspring can come back.

Right now, the illegal scum moans how deporting the parents will "break up families".

What monster would leave a new-born baby behind for a piece of paper, or is this just a bull**** line for the touchy-feely, pro-illegal morons here?

99percenter said:

Does donald trump's election mean the end of automatic citizenship for the children of illegals? He has majorities in both houses and in the judicial after he nominates scalias replacement. All he has to do is overcome a filibuster by democrats and proillegal republicans like rubio or do an executive order. -

Click to expand...

I don't know but I sure hope so..

Cephus said:

But they can't because this is a Constitutional issue that has already been decided by the Supreme Court. The only ones who could overturn it are the Supreme Court and they're sure not going to do it.

Click to expand...

I got curious about this issue myself due to the recent elections and found this discussion. So I looked up some of the case law you are talking about and what I found was a case with a Chinese guy who had legal resident parents was found to be a citizen United States v. Wong Kim Ark, a case involving a Native American who was denied citizenship rights due to being born on a reservation Elk v. Wilkins, and then the case of illegal immigrant children being denied public schooling by the state of Texas got struck down Plyer v. Doe. The Native American situation was handled later by legislation granting citizenship to Natives, which suggests that legislators can confer or deny citizenship.

Reading these cases does not make it clear to me that a law stating that citizenship is only conferred to children born on American Soil if at least one parent is a legal resident or citizen could be struck down as unconstitutional. There is the equal protection clause, but that is equal protection of the law (legislation). It seems like granting citizenship isn't a right that should be protected under that clause of the 14th, it is a gift. There is also the matter of "Subject to Jurisdiction" which was successfully used to deny Natives citizenship. The Natives were not entirely free from the jurisdiction of the US government at that time. I believe for instance, the US government set the boundary lines for the reservations. One could say the same of illegal immigrants in the USA. They do have some subjectivity to the US government, but not total. Anyhow just curious what case law must be overturned here to end birthright citizenship.

Will birthright citizenship end?

Click to expand...

not without an amendment to the Constitution.

legalimmigrant said:

Congress can do many things without directly confronting the SC. Like speeding up deportations of illegals and their "American" offsprings. 18 years later, the offspring can come back.

Right now, the illegal scum moans how deporting the parents will "break up families".

What monster would leave a new-born baby behind for a piece of paper, or is this just a bull**** line for the touchy-feely, pro-illegal morons here?

Click to expand...

You cannot, by law, deport an American citizen and all of those children of illegals are American citizens whether you like it or not. I'm fine with deporting the parents, so long as there is someone to leave the child with, or they can take them with them, but they cannot be deported. That's just how it is.