PDA

View Full Version : Trump plans to sign executive order ending birthright citizenship: report



Teh One Who Knocks
10-30-2018, 11:36 AM
By Benjamin Brown | Fox News


https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/800x600q90/923/PM9Orr.jpg

President Trump said in a newly released interview he plans to sign an executive order ending so-called "birthright citizenship," which allows any baby born on U.S. soil to automatically be a U.S. citizen -- a move that would mark a major overhaul of immigration policy and trigger an almost-certain legal battle.

The policy, which stems from a disputed but long-recognized interpretation of the 14th Amendment, has given rise to what Trump considers abuse of the immigration system. Trump told "Axios on HBO" that the U.S. is the only country in the world "where a person comes in and has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United States ... with all of those benefits."

Despite Trump's claim, the U.S. is not the only nation to have birthright citizenship, but the policy is rare outside of the Americas. Trump called birthright citizenship "ridiculous" and said that "it has to end."

Under current policy, anyone born in the U.S. – regardless of whether they are delivered by a non-citizen or undocumented immigrant – is considered a citizen. The interpretation has been blamed for so-called 'birth tourism' and chain migration.

The 14th Amendment states: "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."

Trump, should he pursue the executive order, would face court challenges, and it remains unclear whether he could prevail. Many legal scholars would argue such a change requires a constitutional amendment. But some conservatives argue the existing amendment holds room for interpretation.

Michael Anton, a former national security adviser for Trump, pointed out in July that "there’s a clause in the middle of the amendment that people ignore or they misinterpret – subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

"What they are saying is, if you are born on U.S. soil subject to the jurisdiction of the United States – meaning you’re the child of citizens or the child of legal immigrants, then you are entitled to citizenship,” Anton told Fox News’ Tucker Carlson in July. “If you are here illegally, if you owe allegiance to a foreign nation, if you’re the citizen of a foreign country, that clause does not apply to you.”

The interview was released after Trump told Fox News that Central American migrants who are approaching the U.S.-Mexico border in caravans are "wasting their time" and vowed, "they are not coming in."

Trump spoke to "The Ingraham Angle" hours after the Pentagon announced it would deploy some 5,200 troops to the southern border in what the commander of U.S. Northern Command described as an effort to "harden the southern border" by stiffening defenses at and near legal entry points.

"When they are captured, we don't let them out," Trump told host Laura Ingraham. "We're not letting them out ... We're not catching, we're not releasing ... We're not letting them into this country."

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals judge James C. Ho, who was appointed by Trump, has argued that it would be “unconstitutional” to change how the 14th amendment was written and that the line subject to debate applies to the legal obligation of all foreigners and immigrants to follow U.S. law, Axios reported.

DemonGeminiX
10-30-2018, 12:32 PM
I disagree here. He can't win this one. Not with the text of the 14th amendment as it is.

Sure, it's a bullshit practice, anchor babies, that is, but an executive order isn't gonna fly here.

Muddy
10-30-2018, 12:33 PM
He probably wont win, but it is a discussion worth having.. It's an exploit of our current laws and system.

Teh One Who Knocks
10-30-2018, 12:35 PM
I disagree here. He can't win this one. Not with the text of the 14th amendment as it is.

Sure, it's a bullshit practice, anchor babies, that is, but an executive order isn't gonna fly here.

Obama's 'Dreamers' executive order shouldn't have been legal either, but here we are.

DemonGeminiX
10-30-2018, 12:38 PM
You're right. It is a discussion worth having. I wholeheartedly agree with that. It has to end, but that constitutional amendment needs to be changed, and we all know that that can't be done by a Presidential wave of the wand, stroke of the pen, whatever. This requires a 2/3s majority of states to deal with.

DemonGeminiX
10-30-2018, 12:40 PM
Obama's 'Dreamers' executive order shouldn't have been legal either, but here we are.

And I felt the same way about the Dreamers program as I do this. It stands to reason that when Trump is shot down here that he could conceivably argue that Obama's program should be scrapped for the same reasons. He'll have a stronger legal foundation to argue against the Dreamers program.

Teh One Who Knocks
10-30-2018, 12:42 PM
And I felt the same way about the Dreamers program as I do this. It stands to reason that when Trump is shot down here that he could conceivably argue that Obama's program should be scrapped for the same reasons. He'll have a stronger legal foundation to argue against the Dreamers program.

The problem is, the courts have already overturned Trump's executive order he signed to get rid of the Dreamer's program.

DemonGeminiX
10-30-2018, 12:46 PM
On what basis? Who were the presiding judges? Again, he'll have more legal ammunition to get rid of it this time around.

Think about it, do you really want the court system to say "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" and allow such an executive order to stand, regardless of who signs it?

Teh One Who Knocks
10-30-2018, 12:53 PM
On what basis? Who were the presiding judges? Again, he'll have more legal ammunition to get rid of it this time around.

Think about it, do you really want the court system to say "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" and allow such an executive order to stand, regardless of who signs it?

Federal court blocks Trump plan to end Daca program for immigrants (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/10/judge-blocks-trump-dreamers-daca-program-immigrants)

RBP
10-30-2018, 12:58 PM
While I tend to think he's just amassing bargaining chips, if they want to continue to be part of the problem, some more drastic measures may be required.

RBP
10-30-2018, 01:00 PM
Federal court blocks Trump plan to end Daca program for immigrants (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/10/judge-blocks-trump-dreamers-daca-program-immigrants)

The 9th circuit in California. :lol:
:shocker:

Even at that, they did not "block" it, they issued a stay pending litigation outcome.

DemonGeminiX
10-30-2018, 01:02 PM
Right, it's a temporary injunction. It's not a dead issue. It'll probably be gummed up for a while, but what I'm saying is, if Trump passes an executive order and it gets shot down by the courts, then he could use that legal decision as a basis to revisit the DACA injunction.

PorkChopSandwiches
10-30-2018, 03:54 PM
He can get away with it by not changing the law but by reinterpreting it

PorkChopSandwiches
10-30-2018, 04:06 PM
https://i.redd.it/arv3crqm5bv11.jpg

PorkChopSandwiches
10-30-2018, 04:13 PM
https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc30867/m1/12/

https://i.redd.it/w2ipjaw3rbv11.jpg

PorkChopSandwiches
10-30-2018, 04:18 PM
https://i.redd.it/ufe6b7glqbv11.jpg

PorkChopSandwiches
10-30-2018, 07:39 PM
https://i.redd.it/k96qwinstbv11.jpg

Muddy
10-30-2018, 08:01 PM
http://i67.tinypic.com/28i85zq.jpg

lost in melb.
10-31-2018, 01:08 AM
It's tricky.

Really someone born in the US should have citizenship - perhaps the problem is citizenship then extends to the parents etc, etc,. No?

DemonGeminiX
10-31-2018, 02:03 AM
It's tricky.

Really someone born in the US should have citizenship - perhaps the problem is citizenship then extends to the parents etc, etc,. No?

That's how they stay. They cross the border and shit out their kid on American soil, then the kid's a citizen but the parents aren't. What are we supposed to do? Confiscate the kid and deport the kid's parents? No, the parents stay on compassionate grounds. But it's a fucking racket. There's supposedly a foreign industry built around it, I think it's been called American natal tourism.

You've got people that have legitimately applied for citizenship, spent all this money, jumped through all these flaming hoops, ran through a gauntlet blindfolded in hopes of having a better life here in the USA, and then you've got these asshats that cross the border illegally and plop out a rugrat just after they've crossed the border and lookee here! Instant citizenship. It shouldn't work that way. It's not fair to the people that go through the hell that we put them through just to get a foot through the front door.

lost in melb.
10-31-2018, 02:35 AM
That's how they stay. They cross the border and shit out their kid on American soil, then the kid's a citizen but the parents aren't. What are we supposed to do? Confiscate the kid and deport the kid's parents? No, the parents stay on compassionate grounds. But it's a fucking racket. There's supposedly a foreign industry built around it, I think it's been called American natal tourism.

You've got people that have legitimately applied for citizenship, spent all this money, jumped through all these flaming hoops, ran through a gauntlet blindfolded in hopes of having a better life here in the USA, and then you've got these asshats that cross the border illegally and plop out a rugrat just after they've crossed the border and lookee here! Instant citizenship. It shouldn't work that way. It's not fair to the people that go through the hell that we put them through just to get a foot through the front door.

I think we all agree you've got to find a way to shore up the border - at least to some extent would be an acceptable start. You can never fully stop people but reducing a flood to a trickle seems reasonable.

Yep, it's cheating. If you start of your citizenship by disrespecting your adoptive country I imagine that trend continues...reminds me of people who enter a new relationship by cheating on their spouse. Bad Karma.

RBP
10-31-2018, 03:42 AM
I think we all agree you've got to find a way to shore up the border

All reasonable people agree. That excludes half the population.

PorkChopSandwiches
10-31-2018, 04:20 PM
That's how they stay. They cross the border and shit out their kid on American soil, then the kid's a citizen but the parents aren't. What are we supposed to do? Confiscate the kid and deport the kid's parents? No, the parents stay on compassionate grounds. But it's a fucking racket. There's supposedly a foreign industry built around it, I think it's been called American natal tourism.

You've got people that have legitimately applied for citizenship, spent all this money, jumped through all these flaming hoops, ran through a gauntlet blindfolded in hopes of having a better life here in the USA, and then you've got these asshats that cross the border illegally and plop out a rugrat just after they've crossed the border and lookee here! Instant citizenship. It shouldn't work that way. It's not fair to the people that go through the hell that we put them through just to get a foot through the front door.

The Russians and Chinese do this as well. The town I live in has had multiple "baby hotels" shut down. This is a big house where they turn each room into 2-3 rooms and fill it with pregnant women so they can give birth here and get their kids citizenship.

Teh One Who Knocks
10-31-2018, 07:22 PM
1057392304217120768
:facepalm:

PorkChopSandwiches
10-31-2018, 07:30 PM
Idiots

DemonGeminiX
10-31-2018, 11:34 PM
1057392304217120768
:facepalm:

Actually, the 14th amendment was created for the slaves and their children, so they wouldn't be disenfranchised by the South after the slaves were freed.

There's an article that approaches it from this angle and says that Trump could end birthright citizenship.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trump-is-right-ending-birthright-citizenship-is-constitutional

It's an interesting read.

PorkChopSandwiches
11-01-2018, 04:03 PM
And the author of the amendment clearly states its not for illegals