Trump says he's going to end constitutional right to birthright citizenship with an executive order

Trump says he’s going to end constitutional right to birthright citizenship with an executive order

The entire tRump clan are the poster children for anchor babies. Clean your finger before you point Donny Two Burgers!


No, it’s just a lot of lawsuit-ready, literally unconstitutional noise to keep single-issue right-wing voters excited for the midterms.


If this could come to pass, we have entered a whole new era where the Constitution of our United States becomes subject to presidential whims. The whole “invading army” hypothesis makes a disturbing kind of sense, in a Trumpian universe. It’s a small step from there to declaring that “certain sorts of people” have “declared themselves to be not under US jurisdiction” by way of acts “against the good of the country” defined, of course, by the DOJ and the executive branch. Someone please tell me this is all a Hallowe’en prank, cause it is scary as hell!


Yes - and to divert progressive resources from the campaign. Which has to be done - because how do you not challenge this?


That’s why they have well-funded “think-tanks”: to use tweezers on every part of the Constitution and past court decisions to find things that can be manipulated.


Oh, the president doesn’t understand how the constitution works? You don’t say!


Most of the think-tanks, like the conservative efforts to indoctrinate judges on the lower courts, are focused on making America more “business friendly” (i.e. making sure the government lets the “slow AIs” do whatever they want, human persons outside the 1% be damned). But yes, some of them are focused on re-instating permission to discriminate in order to Make America Great White Again.


I think this has been the idea from the moment he started characterizing them as rapists and murderers while protecting rapists and murderers. The right doesn’t know how to function without a war. So they will make a war.


So our domestic terrorist in chief wants to destroy our constitution… you don’t say.


Will they allow Mischling ersten Grades, or only Mischling zweiten Grades?


That’s going to piss of a lot of Russians
Russian Anchor Babies


Beyond the 14th Amendment - they’re going to have a difficult time arguing that this wasn’t the intent of the Founders because even during the revolution:

"Sailor’s Snug Harbor

In the case of Inglis v. Trustees of Sailor’s Snug Harbor, 28 U.S. 99 (1830) the Supreme Court decided the question of the disposition of the estate of a man born in New York State in 1776. The Supreme Court resolved complicated questions of how citizenship had been derived during the Revolutionary War. The court found that the jus soli is so consistent in American Law as to automatically grant American citizenship to children born in New York City between the Declaration of Independence and the Landing at Kip’s Bay in 1776, but not to children born in New York during the British occupation that followed.[52]

Nothing is better settled at the common law than the doctrine that the children even of aliens born in a country while the parents are resident there under the protection of the government and owing a temporary allegiance thereto are subjects by birth."



But they’re fairly pale, so their citizenship will not be questioned.


During the 1980s, Phil Donahue went around with a Soviet Union pundit named Vladimir Posner. Posner said that the difference between the US Bill of Rights and the Soviet Union Bill of Rights was that in the Soviet Union all the clauses were simply ignored. It is easy to ignore parts of the Constitution if the only people who could prevent it are equally corrupt and of the same mind as the dictator.


You know, I think this might actually be a needed move but not for the reasons Trump thinks. I have been speculating what a shift to Jus sanguinis would look like. Something similar to what the UK has. Which has a mix of Jus sanguinis and Jus Soli. Basically if one parent is a UK citizen, it passes to the child. Jus Soli kicks in under certain circumstances, it isn’t as broad as the US.

I think if we have immigration reform to allow more in with paths to citizenship, and have an increase in social programs, it will make sense to alter citizenship rules some. That map is a little misleading as the light blue with restrictions, including much of socialized Europe, mostly includes restrictions where a parent needs to be a citizen already. Although I don’t think that either system is inherently “right”, Jus sanguinis I think CAN be more flexible for the prospect of dual citizenship. Unfortunately, that didn’t work out when we tried to get my kid Polish citizenship.


Still, any change like that can’t be done with an executive order. Derp.

1 Like

/s /s /s


I take your point about Marbury vs. Madison and hope you are correct.

OTOH, Trump isn’t going to try to repeal the 14th by fiat, he (or his people) will look for a way to carve out an exception to the 14th. As with the Travel Ban, the legal case will focus on the limits of executive power (where Kavanaugh, in particular, has some very broad views) and the process of judicial review is central to it moving forward.

If the administration succeeds in carving out a narrow exemption to the 14th (@AlexG55 provides a frighteningly plausible example), then expect them to use that exemption as a pry bar to crack open all sorts of other treasure troves of discrimination and disenfranchisement.


Came here to post about this. This is a mini-industry in Sunny Isles FL (aka North Miami Beach) where there is a Trump Towers and Trump Beach Resort that caters to to Eastern Europeans and a lot of Russians.
The area is now nicknamed Little Moscow.


1 week before the midterm elections,



Kudos to Axios for really holding Trump’s feed to the fire by posting an article today about how no, the US is not actually the only country with birthright citizenship, that’s really thinking on your feet.

Wouldn’t it have been lovely if the Axios folks* had the foresight to plan for and/or intellectual capacity to ask a follow-up question that asked if he was aware that he was factually mistaken, and pressed him even mildly on the identity of “they” who are telling him this nonsense? No, perish the thought–sitting in quiet subservience with no follow-up is every US journalist’s duty when interviewing the President. If he says the sun rises in the west and shoelaces cause cavities, the only thing a “journalist” can do is to move on the the next question.

*I can’t be bothered to look at the person’s name who actually conducted the interview–if these doofuses want to pretend they’re Publius, fine