Summary
Trump announced plans to end birthright citizenship via executive action, despite its constitutional basis in the 14th Amendment.
He also outlined a mass deportation policy, starting with undocumented immigrants who committed crimes and potentially expanding to mixed-status families, who could face deportation as a unit.
Trump said he wants to avoid family separations but left the decision to families.
While doubling down on immigration restrictions, Trump expressed willingness to work with Democrats to create protections for Dreamers under DACA, citing their long-standing integration into U.S. society.
Not sure how he plans on deporting people who were born in the United States and have no citizenship anywhere else since not every country automatically gives it to people’s children born abroad.
They would effectively have no home country to deport them too.
That didn’t stop them from deporting people to Mexico in the 30s. A senator at the time estimated that 60% of those who were removed from the country were US Citizens
He was already shocked Honduras(?) turned down his “offer” to send them deported people. I think it’s only a matter of time before they send a plane somewhere anyhow and get US flights promptly everywhere.
You are missing out on a key component of their plan: concentration camps.
He has outright said that he plans on using the same law that was used to justify the internment of Japanese citizens during WW2.
Literal concentration camps are coming.
They would effectively become stateless. And how they do what from there depends a lot on where they are forcefully relocated to. Assuming the majority will be forced into Mexico, Mexico has an established legal process for accepting refugees. Through the application process, if approved, you (and your family unit) would gain permanent residency. It’s not the same as citizenship, but you could stay there indefinitely and have mostly the same rights as Mexican citizens. You might run into issues with getting passports and traveling internationally, but at the least, you would be able to stay in Mexico. That depends on your refugee application being approved, and I’d imagine when the numbers cross over into the millions their established system would break down a bit and there would probably be very long delays during which you could be deported.
If it’s somewhere else, well, it varies widely. Most of the Caribbean islands have comparatively smaller populations and probably only handle migration on a small scale. It’s very hard to say how things would play out. Many would almost certainly be forced to illegally immigrate back into America.
Hello. Australian here. Just ask our sadistic government. We do it all the time. Hint: It involves putting people in camps.
Little camps for homework. Where you can concentrate.
Even bigger question: what then?
Say you deport a citizen of Mexican origin to Mexico. Can’t they just, you know, go back? They’re citizens, with a passport/id.
The only alternative is to strip them (at least de facto) of their citizenship, which is literally a Hitler move (https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gesetz_über_den_Widerruf_von_Einbürgerungen_und_die_Aberkennung_der_deutschen_Staatsangehörigkeit, only a German source, unfortunately).
Yes they’ll have to revoke citizenship.
Which may be the end goal, use this as a wedge to convince their base that revoking citizenship may be justified in some cases.
Happened to my grandfather. A Jew born in Germany who emigrated to England in the late 1920s. I have his naturalisation papers from when he became a citizen of the UK in 1936 and his nationality is listed as “stateless.”
You don’t even need to read the article. The title states quite clearly this is about citizenship not residence.
He doesn’t plan on shit. Even this Supreme Court would tell him to fuck off.
Given that the Supreme Court ruled that all official (who decides?) acts are legal, I have no faith in them.
Meaning they will stay in the concentration camps until Trump’s Final Solution is implemented.
Slavery is much more economically viable than extermination. So, thank you capitalism, I think?
But you also have to keep slaves relatively healthy to maintain them working. If you slaves get too hungry, they can’t do whatever labor you make em do. If they get real sick, it’s going to affect your other slaves.
And human slaves usually don’t put their heads down and do it forever. A lot of the Nazi labor camps massacred their captives because they started uprisings.
There is nothing economically feasible with what they want. They just think they can do what they want and he even richer. Which is why you can look at the entirety of recorded human history for these same mistakes being repeated over and over again.
They also don’t seem to know or tend to forget that it only needs a relatively small percentage of the population to flat out resist for society to stop working. Only a few hundreds of thousands of protesters in East Germany brought the country to its knees and effectively ended the Cold War.
That’s easy, you just continue to expand the list “undesirables”.
A “Fine ol’ solution” as they say in Florida
I should invest in corrections, sounds like a goldmine
My 86-year old mother is house-bound but she is the daughter of two immigrants who came over in the 1910’s, so I guess she’s gonna be shipped off to another country. I have no idea if my brother and I, both in our 50’s would be subjected to deportation considering we haven’t lived with her in over 30 years.
Maybe the US shouldn’t have elected an out-and-out racist asshole.
I’m the child of an immigrant and a native-born person. So does half of my citizenship get taken away?
Decide which half of you body gets to stay
The lower half. I might lose my penis, but I get to keep my brain.
Unless this is a vertical bisection of course. Then the left side because I’m left-handed.
Although I wouldn’t have my right brain hemisphere anymore… Now I’m confused.
Trump opted to deport his brain and he’s going to be a 2 time president. May want to keep the penis.
Congrats, nearly everyone in the written history of america are immigrants. Anyone after the declaration ? Gone! Immigrants from first and second world war? Gone! Good old usa! ( /s incase its not obvious)
This would be huge. Much like Europe, America’s population will decline. You need immigrants.
They’ll have to sure it up with forced pregnancy next
It’s not gonna happen. It would open up challenges to constitutional amendments that he and his supporters care about.
Don’t worry, the supreme kangaroo court will find a way
He doesn’t care about the constitution. Like not even a little. He has said as much when he called for the termination of the constitution in 2022.
Plenty of his supporters care about the 2nd amendment. Trump is extremely thin-skinned when it comes to his popularity and self-preservation.
Immigrants are the heart and soul of this country. I can’t even imagine wanting to live in whatever milquetoast, boring-ass, white bread America that these idiots want.
I like immigration too. The right’s issue with immigration isn’t immigration itself.
They want it to look like 1950s propaganda, but work like feudalism.
Anyone in the US who believes they have any sort of legal protection is just delusional. There only protection that exists there is through money.
We’re basically going back to an older era where rights are much less certain. Think of the rights people in the US had before Roe v Wade. Yep, we are basically back to before Roe v Wade was passed. That’s the America we live in.
We’re going back to the “political spoils” system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoils_system
i wish everyone would get rid of the assumption that the constitution will protect you
“that’s unconstitutional!!!” doesn’t mean jack shit anymore
I’ve noticed many Americans also talk about those ‘unalienable rights’ like it’s some law of nature. They’re not unalienable. Having rights is not a given. Ask many groups of people throughout history. You only have rights as long as others respect them. Where are your unalienable rights when you’re grabbed off the street in a black van and taken somewhere without anyone knowing? When your fellow citizens / your government decides you shouldn’t have them anymore? If rights were unalienable, why are they dependent on borders?
Sometimes I think people feel too safe. Otherwise they wouldn’t accept others losing their rights so easily. They still think they won’t/can’t lose their own.
The constitution is more what you’d call “guidelines” than actual rules.
Every maga is downplaying his shit right now. “Not gonna happen” is what they all say.
They’ll deny it until it is happening and they feel safe to admit they believed him and wanted it to happen.
Yup. This exact shit has essentially destroyed my relationship with my parents. I can only ignore the repugnant politics for so long and up to a certain point before I have to reconsider if I want that hatred and bigotry in my life.
Yeah just like roe overturn didn’t happen 🙄
Okay, we don’t need to go adding extra stupid stuff. At the base level you’re doing their normalization for them. At the high level we need an accurate idea of what’s coming so we can prepare.
Watching the actual interview it’s clear he makes some assertions. They don’t want to separate families so they will send the US citizens with the family if the family wants. What this generally means is when the parents are undocumented but a kid is a citizen. This interview does not support denaturalizing people, (but he did do that in his first term), or forcing American citizens in a mixed status family who are adults to leave.
On the 14th the interviewer wanted and got an answer from an 80 year old partially senile man. His first, natural answer to the 14th amendment question was he would go to the people. He only noncommittally said he would look at an EO when then interviewer kept asking him but what about an executive order. If he’s mentioned doing that before the proper way is to bring up what he said before and see if he still holds that position. Not repeating, “but what about an EO” 5 times until you get the funny and the headline writers can celebrate.
The open question is how will this highly suggestable man fare around the likes of Stephen Miller.
first idea of his that i dont find completely stupid
You uh… okay with voiding parts of the Constitution with a vote in Congress? or Executive Order?
im not american, but if youre trying to justify a system where it is extremely difficult to change laws and rules that are outdated or no longer feasable, be my guest.
The entire reason they’re so hard to change is so they don’t get changed on a whim. If it’s in that document it’s because 3/4 of every elected representative in every state thought it was that important. Letting Congress change something like that with a simple majority or filibuster majority is ridiculous and means either party could completely re-write the basis of our laws at will just by changing that document. For example instead of trying to change and enforce every law about marriage and benefits they could simply pass a constitutional change to define marriage conservatively and let the courts go through striking down the now unconstitutional normal laws.
Making that document hard to change is one of the things America got right.
Why shouldn’t someone born in a country get citizenship regardless of who their parents are?
Why is punishing a child for what their parents did not completely stupid?
That’s some apartheid-level shit.
why is this a punishment? do you realize that if you are born on a vacation of your parents, this prevents you from getting citizenship. is this logical to you?
do you realize that if you are born on a vacation of your parents, this prevents you from getting citizenship.
That is absolutely false.
It’s only a core tenet of our country after all
as are guns. both are not necessarily beneficial
You have to have experience with a certain kind of person, in order to accept that they exist, in order to accept that weapons is the only way to deal with them, in order to get the second amendment.
It’s possible to think it through logically, but generally speaking people refuse to accept the existence of that kind of person, and refuse to let go of the idea that there may be some way to change the person’s intentions and choices without violence, so that neither party initiates violence.
The ultimate utility of weapons comes from that one kind of person, who just won’t pay heed to anything else. Until you’ve been forced to accept their existence in reality, the mind is just unwilling to entertain it.
what
TLDR: if you can’t conceive of a reason to need weapons it is because you have noy encountered a person for whom no other options exist to influencce their behavior.
that is some suggestive bs
does that include melania and elon?
No
In other news, 34 criminal convictions by a unanimous jury (which is near impossible to win) doesn’t make you a criminal either apparently. You’re only a criminal if you’re related to Biden (and don’t worry, revenge porn by Marjorie is perfectly ok too)
You could bring down the average conviction rate in the US simply by deporting Trump
Start with musk or stfu
Musk doesn’t have birthright citizenship. As much as we wish he’d just go away, I hope you’re not suggesting they should expand this program to strip naturalized citizens.
He worked on a student visa after dropping school.
That’s illegal, so he shouldn’t have qualified for naturalization without correcting that and leaving the country before reapplying.
So you agree that he doesn’t have birthright status?
You’re barking up a tree that really doesn’t need it.
I feel like there should be a saying involving palm trees with this, as their bark is very different and they are actually closer to grasses than most trees.
Chop down a palm tree and count the rings to see how old it is, the answer is 0. They don’t make rings, much like a blade of grass. They are fn dinosaur grass basically. (They were around back then). It’s also part of how they can bend and not snap as easily during high winds.
She gets it
You understand the bark here is about a dog baying that they’ve treed an animal you’re hunting like a raccoon, but the raccoon isn’t in that tree, right?
Why would a raccoon chase a dog up a left tree? 🌴
Haha yeah, I get what the saying is about
He lied on his Visa papers and is literally an illegal immigrant.
Only thing naturalized about him is his bank account which is what has kept him off the icehouse list
Will be funny if they have a falling out and Trump rage enforces this against him.
They will inevitably have a falling out because they are both nepo baby idiots who can’t maintain long term relationships aside from sycophants and bootlickers.
That would literally be the single funniest thing that has ever happened in the history of mankind.
Or barron
I think that’s too far. It’s such a good story, and it’s the way it’s always been in my lifetime before: you’re born in the USA, you get automatic US citizenship. No matter why your parents happen to be here. Maybe you have a layover in Miami on the way from Buenos Aires London, you go into labor and have the child at a hospital near the airport, that kid is a US citizen.
That makes sense to me (admittedly, probably because that’s the way it’s always been).
It’s like a nice little bonus for some people, and people can aim for it, and it’s a good story.
Abortion rights was always how it had been in my lifetime, but look at us now.
Who could have possibly seen this coming?
What about his birthright citizenship? His family came to the Americas as immigrants too.
He doesn’t mean white people, silly.
He’s orange though
He doesn’t mean the denizens of Loompaland either. They’re the good Africans.
Yeah and the citizenship he fixed during his previous term for the parents of Melania is also completely fine. It’s just all the other ones that need to be deported. “deport all the immigrants! (selectively, based on racism that is)”
His mother was from Scotland. Also, all of his kids except Tiffany should be denied birthright citizenship, right?
And his wife, and her parents 😂
Classic “Got mine, fuck you”.
Deport to where…
When Republicans say deport 5% of the population what they mean is put them in camps until they die because there’s no way they could process all that paperwork
Even if they could process all that paperwork, those countries have to want those people back. You can’t just land a bunch of C-130s full of people in Guatemala City and dump them onto the tarmac. That’s not how anything works.
So even if somehow they knew where every single person in those camps is “supposed” to go, many of them would stay there indefinitely anyway. Until, I guess, they come up with a Final Solution for them.
And if they were born in America then there is no other country for them to go to
Things that aren’t possible, at least under current legal frameworks.
I know that laws are only as good as they’re enforced and all but barring wholesale collapse I find it hard to see Donny pulling that off.
It is absolutely possible under America’s legal framework. Mackenzie v Hare was the 1915 Supreme Court case, which ruled that a natural-born U.S. citizen woman could lose her citizenship by marrying a non-citizen man.
The holding functionally stood until 1967, when there was a case called Afroyim v. Rusk, where the court held that natural born citizens cannot be stripped of their citizenship involuntarily. But that was a 5-4 decision in the Warren Court, in many regards, the most liberal supreme court in history. A decision that barely won a majority in a court drastically more liberal than this one is what’s standing between today and a world where natural born citizens can have their citizenship deemed forfeit.
I’m cool with brain drain – if this actually happens a nice European country will happily open their doors to the educated (see Ireland, Spain already) and america will further collapse like it should.
I think there is a specific “class” of people they’re going to target.
I am not a lawyer, this is my interpretation of the situation.
So heres what I think will happen.
Birthright citizenship will not be completely gone.
To recap, 14th Amendment, Section1 says:
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.
What will most likely happen is the DoJ under trump will take it to the supreme court, then the 6 conservatives will rule that unauthorized immigrants are not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”, so therefore their children do not get citizenship at birth. Maybe this is retroactive, maybe it applies from then on, I don’t know.
But thats the most likely scenario.
Because we had a very conservative court back in the 1898 (remember, black people in this era couldn’t even vote in southern states) that ruled that (United States v. Wong Kim Ark)
a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China",[5] automatically became a U.S. citizen at birth.
So I doubt this supreme court is more conservative than a 1898 supreme court so they most likely are not overturning that.
Basically, that court ruled that children of permanent residents have birthright citizenship, but never ruled on whether children of unauthorized immigrants have birthright citizenship. This 6-3 supreme court is gonna answer that. Which is gonna be a no, unfortunately.
More likely, a lower court shoots it down, and there’s no basis for an appeals court to do anything different. They tweak it and try again. That one also fails. Try again.
Eventually, they get something that threads the needle. This is how the “Muslim ban” went.
I mean, the supreme court could always pull out the “Original Jurisdiction” BS and take it straight there.
There are two other factors at work:
- A bunch of conservative-related businesses know what a clusterfuck it will be for their bottom line; that will push the Supreme Court to pretend there’s no issue here
- The Supreme Court can only take so many cases at a time
Even if we assume they’re just going to bypass the usual ladder up the federal court system, they can’t do that on everything just as a practical matter.
I enjoy the notion that they would argue that undocumented immigrants are not subject to US law in the fashion that diplomats aren’t subject to US law, since that would effectively prevent anything except deportation as a punishment for crimes.
“Your children can’t be citizens, but you can murder with impunity until we ask you to leave”.I concur with your interpretation. But as for your final line, I’m not sure why this interpretation is unfortunate. We need to streamline and overhaul the immigration process for sure, but why is encouraging unregulated immigration a good thing?
I say unfortunately because there could be problems with a child of an undocumented immigrant that is born and grew up in the US for their entire life, then suddenly losing their citizenship because of a court decision.
Maybe if the decision did not apply retroactively, then I’d might be okay with it.
Oh yeah, that’s definitely a bad outcome, I agree. Thankfully retroactive laws seem to be much harder to pass.
