At what point does everyone say “if he’s not following the law, then neither should we”?
I came to that conclusion when he won the election despite his numerous crimes.
At the very least, I would like to see every Democratic lawmaker calling for the open violation of Supreme Court rulings. They are a fundamentally illegitimate institutions. Their opinions should be given less respect than the opinions of a shit-covered hobo holding an “the end is near” sign by the side of the road.
I break laws all the time now. They have no meaning. It’s like the wild west now
I’m ready if you are
Guilty. I’ve stolen 2 elections already and dogwhistled so much
Can you please just give them back? We’ve been looking for them literally everywhere
Also, those whistles give me a headache
deleted by creator
As long as it doesn’t immediately result in you dead or in jail.
That point was sometime around the first term but the “wE aRe NOt thERe Yet” crowd keeps moving the goal post
At what point are you willing to sacrifice your life for your cause?
This title isn’t true. The court has not “given the OK”
This is just cope. They did give the OK. They didn’t technically say he could revoke birthright citizenship, but they removed the ability for people to effectively challenge the revocation of their citizenship. If you can’t actually exercise your rights, then your rights don’t exist.
But keep huffing the copium.
Please explain how they removed the ability to challenge it.
Also, they are still going to make a decision. Just haven’t done it yet.
Please explain your current understanding of the ruling in full before you ask others for lengthy explanations.
I asked you first. So annoying.
Here ya go: The ruling is against universal injunctions. Any existing injunctions stay and any future plaintiffs can block the order as well. It just can’t be stopped across the country from any existing or future rulings. Unless of course the Supreme Court ends up saying it’s unconstitutional.
Your turn.
And you don’t see the blindingly obvious problems with that, the issues that have been repeatedly pointed out in dozens of articles on the subject? I’m sorry, but you just aren’t operating in good faith. You’re either willfully ignoring those issues, or you are demanding others do your homework for you.
So you don’t have an answer to my question? Sounds like you’re the one operating blindly. Just saying things.
No, I just don’t suffer fools.
The supreme court did give the ok saying that it comes down to states and individuals to stop it.
That isn’t true. That is what sensationalist headlines said the verdict as. The verdict had nothing to do with birthright citizenship.
We desperately need media literacy training as a species.
It is true. It’s not a ruling on birthright citizenship but it does stop the injunction against it.
Edit to explain because I doubt you grasp: Without the injunction he’s free to act on a birthright citizenship ban unless sued by individuals or states on the behalf of said individuals. So over 20 states have no limit to this executive order pausing the deportation of people born in the US because they haven’t sued the federal government for breaking the 14th amendment.
If anything this is far worse than just birthright citizenship because Trump can write executive orders far faster than lawsuits can be brought against the administration and lower federal courts can’t file injunctions against the administration, states or individuals have to sue.
Again: The supreme court did give the ok, saying that it comes down to states and individuals to stop it because it removed the lower courts’ ability to file injunctions.
Because you doubt I’ll grasp… Why?
You’re the one who ate up the sensationalistic news headlines and regurgitated them like a good little boy?
I’m not going to read the content of your response because you open with inflammatory bullshit. Grow up.
Tagged as “fucking douche.”
Ohh your feelings hurt because everyone downvoted you. Cool, take it out on me. That’s the Hallmark of someone to take seriously in conversation.
Because you doubt I’ll grasp… Why?
I’m not going to read
Heh
Start media literacy training by never citing YouTube videos as sources. It’s far better to learn to read.
The word for learning to read books is literacy.
I was talking specifically about learning to read things that are not books.
Right, they only said “nobody can stop you from doing illegal things.”
Completely different.
It was about whether or not a federal court can issue a nationwide injunction.
The verdict has much more to do with active cases of deportees suing the US than it does to do with birthright citizenship.
This is technically true, but it’s also wrong.
Yes, they didn’t technically rule on birthright citizenship, but it doesn’t matter. Without national injunctions, your right to birthright citizenship doesn’t actually exist as a practical matter.
By the time you can file your individual case challenging the revocation of your citizenship, you’ll already be in an ICE concentration camp. And you don’t have a right to an attorney during immigration proceedings.
I don’t see anything wrong with this. That’s how you end up with an Israel.
This is the final nail in the coffin of the Constitution. As a lawyer for the federal government, I need everyone to know that this officially marks the end of United States rule of law. Protect yourselves, and godspeed.
This is definitely worrisome.
But is it the end of the Constitution quite yet?
The Supreme Court hasn’t weighed in on the executive order trying to negate birthright citizenship, they said that lower courts couldn’t block EO’s at a national level.
Implicitly, their not commenting on the EO feels like they’ll let it stand when the case arrives, if they choose to hear it. Then I’d say the US Constitution is toast.
I’m an engineer, not a lawyer. I’d love to hear what someone more knowledgeable about this thinks.
They ended the ability of the Judiciary to check the Executive. That’s the very foundation of the government, set out in the Constitution: https://constitution.findlaw.com/article1/annotation01.html
So yeah, it’s the final nail in the coffin of the Constitution.
I’m not happy about this either, but let’s just make sure we’re all on the same page here:
They ended the ability of the Judiciary to check the Executive.
No, they ended the ability of the lower courts to check the executive nationwide. The supreme court can still check the executive (and the US Court of Appeals?).
Now I’m trying to figure out if the lower courts can still check the executive, but only in their respective areas, or if they can make a decision, but it has to be confirmed by (at least?) the court of appeals.
From what I’m reading here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/06/supreme-court-sides-with-trump-administration-on-nationwide-injunctions-in-birthright-citizenship-case/
It looks like a lower court can still request to check the executive, but the higher courts will need to grant it. At least according to Kavanaugh’s opinion:
the courts of appeals and the Supreme Court will inevitably weigh in on district court decisions granting or denying requests for preliminary injunctions.
Yes, let’s make sure we’re on the same page. You’re talking about theory, I’m talking about practice - which, in theory, are the same. In practice, however…
Oh, in practice it’s been dead for decades.
Yes it is. Trump can effectively ignore any constitutional amendment for more than long enough to start sending people to concentration camps. This also probably isn’t the end of it, as I doubt the justices will be more willing to stand up to him in the future once he’s consolidated power further.
There isn’t going to be a single moment that the constitution stops existing, like a light switch. It’s an erosion, like the start of a landslide, and the snow is already moving
The fact they took a copout path to not speak to the important part is a worrisome sign. If the matter were actually before them, they may rule it as unconditional, but they seem to be inclined to have the matter never be technically before them.
A district ruling against the order? Let it stand without taking up the case and potentially setting it nationwide. The people have no standing to appeal because they won their case.
Oh look, a jusge in Texas ruled in favor of the order, all of a sudden the government is shuffling immigrants around and deporting all birthright citizens from that jurisdiction.
Billionaires and politicians. No one else matters. Don’t be distracted by the broke Nazis at ICE. The true threat numbers in the hundreds.
Well, honestly, billionaires and politicians also wouldn’t have any guaranteed rights. No one would, because anybody could have citizenship taken away at any moment: we are all citizens because we were born here and no other reason.
The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.
I’m coping so hard by hoping that we swing very hard to the left, if only just so that these cynical, fossilized assholes live to see their bullshit rulings used against them.
I wish we could even agree where left was, but we have as many Zohran Momandi supporters as people who think Zohran’s party are satan worshipping paid shills.
Can Trump prove his citizenship, if this policy goes through?
His 1st & current wife were not citizens when those children were born. They should be deported.
So like every country in Europe, got it.
Change the constitution then. It’s crystal clear. We don’t live in a vibe democracy. You don’t jut get to pick and choose what laws you get to follow if you want to be a nation of laws at all.
Europe isn’t the Americas. Nearly every country in the Americas has birthright citizenship. Your nation is an outlier in the Western Hemisphere if it doesn’t have birthright citizenship. In any country composed of large settler populations, birthright citizenship is essential to preventing the formation of a slave caste. If you lack it, you inevitably end up with multi-generational illegal immigrant communities, which end up forming a slave caste of exploitable labor.
I for one oppose the creation of a slave caste, so I am in favor of birthright citizenship.
I appreciate what you’re saying, but wouldn’t one way to solve that problem be to remove folks who aren’t here legally? I don’t like Trump or his policies, but what he’s doing, as horrible as it is, seems to rectify the situation of having a slave caste. In fact, I see articles posted here all the time talking about how they can’t find people to work farms. It’s obviously created other problems, but they’re kind of irrelevant for this discussion.
I don’t know how the US can’t function the same way as a European nation just because it’s geographically across an ocean. I do agree with you that it shakes out that way, but I’m not sure why where the US is plays a role. How long does the US need to wait to not be composed of large settler populations?
Honest question here too because I appreciate your viewpoint, and I just know there’s a lot of folks across the pond who are quick to say America bad, and then America adjusts it’s tack to perform the same way as those countries, and I hear no, not like that.
So your saying you would support if they updated it to, everyone who is here as of Jan 1st, 2026 (or whenever it passed) is legally a citizen whether or not they were in the naturalization process, and only their decendents can get birthright citizenships. (And all future citizens who get naturalized by sponsorship)
I could be fine with that IF every workplace is mandated to sponsor every person they hire on a work visa. If they are caught hiding that they hired a worker the company is dissolved and the owners/executives get life in prison. All student Visa’s allowed a fast tract acceptance to a work visa while attending school or a period of forebearance while it processes if applied for within 90 days of leaving the educational institution.
Asylum applications need to be updated to NOT require the person to be on U.S. soil and made accessible online. If a person applies for asylum and any personal information down to just giving a name is leaked by any member of our government or institutions set to minotor/run those applications, the penalty is life in prison.
What you’re apparently too blind to see is that Trump doesn’t deport illegal immigrants - he MAKES illegal immigrants. He’s turning legal immigrants into illegal immigrants by revoking their immigration status. And he wants to do the same to born US citizens.
And you can try to breeze away the problems of lacking birthright citizenship with your hypothetical, but it’s just that, a hypothetical. Meanwhile, in actual history, when you don’t have something like birthright citizenship, you DO end up with a multigenerational slave caste. You can never remove everyone as business interests don’t actually want the undocumented population removed. They just want them in hiding and in fear so they can exploit their labor.
The US also has along history of not granting full citizenship to large swathes of its population. We had widespread chattel slavery. We had Jim Crow. We still have prison slavery. We have a long history of our worst people trying to deliberately engineer a class of people who don’t fully count as human and can thus become cheap exploitable labor. That’s why we need a hard rule that says, “fuck you, you asshat politician. Everyone born here is a citizen, full stop.”
Europe is hardly a model to emulate. Many European countries have just the type of slave caste I’m talking about - unassimilated groups of immigrants that have been there for generations yet still lack citizenship.
If you were born here, you deserve to be a citizen. Your very physical being is formed from the air, the water, and the food of this land. Anyone born in America is an American, and any US politician who refuses this truth deserves to be hanged for treason against the Republic. Trump literally deserves to be hanged for this. That is not an exaggeration or hyperbole. He literally deserves to die for this. In a just world, he would be tried and executed for his betrayal of this fundamental American value. He has committed treason against the Republic.
Of all the things European countries do, that’s the one you like?
this is insane
deleted by creator
But don’t you see? By losing, we sent a message to the Democratic Party leadership and now they’re totally moving left!
all those cuomo endorsements really show they’re willing to listen
thier response is to moving right
Time for guillotines
The supreme court did not give the OK. They said that you have to sue individually or as a class action and kicked it back down to the lower court. And several orgs are currently petitioning for class action status.
Edit: they also said courts can’t issue nationwide injunctions, they have to be narrower.
When talking about birthright citizenship, how do you get narrower than nationwide injunctions?
What the Republicans in the Supreme Court seem to be arguing is that the president can ignore the law as long as the people affected can’t afford a lawsuit.
Iirc, the way it’ll work out is if you’re born in one of the 22 blue states with an order, you get to be a citizen. If you’re born in a red state, though, you’re fucked. It’s a very strange issue to patchwork, though, even stranger than abortion.
The Supreme Court hasn’t actually decided if it’s illegal or not. This is just about injunctions to stop Trumps EO.
That being said, it’s also a federal issue so you couldn’t get a patchwork like abortion.
Unless I’m missing something?
The news was talking about the patchwork, and yeah, you’d think it’s a federal issue but the injunctions can only apply where the lawsuits were, hence the 22 states that sued. At least for now.
At least that’s my understanding. It likely can’t stay in this limbo for long, anyway. Will this court be corrupt enough to say it’s constitutional when it’s clearly not? I really hope not.
The Supreme Court onky stated the injunctions must be “narrower”, but didn’t provide specifications as to what that means (to my understanding/recollection). They could still say a statewide injunction is too broad.
But yeah, I agree, I don’t know how you have a patchwork of injunctions on birthright citizenship. It just sounds do stupid. Either it is or isn’t legal, and you probably should figure it out before allowing it to affect anyone.
But the Republicans on the Supreme Court clearly don’t care about the law anymore.
As much as I dislike the decision, they did not give the “ok”
The ruling was about how the lower courts handle injunctions. The court cases are playing out still.
I still hate the decision.
They effectively did. They are Supreme Court justices, not idiots.
It doesn’t sound like those two things are mutually exclusive.
As much as we would like to, associating this with stupidity diminishes the actual malicious intent of these decisions.
Fair enough. This decision was definitely evil.
Read the dissents, they absolutely fucking did.
This
Bunch of pansies. All they had to do is say No
And would have been the end of it. But they are scared of him for w/e reason. Trump can’t even remember Barrett.
Effectively, anyone who does not have a lawyer who files a specific suit in a very short period of time can be deported at will. Saying it does not end the 14th Amendment is an exercise in English language mechanics, not in how it ends up affecting the world.
If you are high school student who is shipped off to a foreign prison, how likely do you think it is somebody will fight to bring you back?
Look at roe vs wade. The Supreme Court said it’s up to the states which effectively killed abortion . The end result is going to be basically the same thing here
So literally what happened here is Trump said, “I want to violate the Constitution” and the Supreme Court said, " Okay — go ahead."
And that’s it for the rule of law in the US.
All that’s left now is to tally the mass murders along the way to the inevitable collapse of the US, and to hope that our descendents can build something better out of the rubble.
That’s not literally what happened at all. Trump said, “I want to violate the constitution and issued an order”. Then states cities and organizations sued across three cases and courts issued universal injunctions. Trump said “wah! Help me puppet kourt!” Then the Supreme Court was like, “be still mein führer. We will not allow these injunctions to apply to the entire nation. Only to those who have sued.”
They gave him second base. Let’s see if they go all the way for Don Don.
I’m not a USer so correct me if wrong here, but is the implication then that something can be considered constitutional in one state but not in another? How does that work?
No. The core issue has not been decided. When courts in one state rule differently from courts in another, it goes up to federal court. When federal courts in different circuits rule differently, it goes up to SCOTUS. This issue isn’t at that point just yet.
It doesn’t. The ruling makes little sense and is just showing that playing the game with absolutely no ethics works very well.
The US collapsing is going to absolutely affect the rest of the world. This is very VERY bad.
On unrelated news, what would happen if people stopped paying federal taxes?
I.e., if all of california, or blue states in general, stopped paying federal taxes simultaneously, what would realistically be the outcome?
How would it affect the US? How would it affect the states?
And: Is there a proper place to discuss ideas such as this one?
My (very rough) understanding is that people pay income taxes to the federal tax agency directly. From there, the central US government sends parts of it back to the states, to do things with it such as public services.
Blue states are more economically heavy than red states. They pay in more than they get out. If they stop paying taxes, the US suffers but they get to keep a larger share to themselves? My understanding is very rough, it’s just a rough idea.
It could weaken Trump’s government?
To get a meaningful amount of people to withhold their taxes from the Fed you’d probably need to get enough people working and acting together that you’d already have been able to elect progressive politicians to begin with.
Last time shit got real bad economically we had general strikes, the building of unions, trust and monopoly regulation, etc.
So… He’s goin to deport Baron Trump then, right?
I’m all for deporting all of the Trumps, but technically he has citizenship because of his terrible father, regardless of birth location or his mother’s citizenship status.
No we should deport the Trumps. I’m sure we can find some minor error or omission in his father’s old citizenship application. Do what they’re doing - go back up the family tree, declare their ancestor’s citizenship fraudulent, and deport their whole rotten family tree.
Where in the Constitution do we spell out that citizenship is granted to a child on the basis of the status of the father, regardless of birth location or their mother’s status?
If you end birthright citizenship, then nobody gets to be a citizen by birth. If you can’t be a citizen by birth, the only way to become a citizen is naturalization. If the only citizens are naturalized people, the country is 100% immigrants.
It’s just the title, it even says in the article he would move forward with trying to redefine the 14th amendment. Basically it’ll be if your parents are citizens, and your born here, you’ll be a citizen. (My best guess)
I see, so he wants to change it to what it is already? Makes sense.
No, right now if your parents aren’t citizens, and you are born here, you become a citizen. Say you come on a student visa, get pregnant your junior year and drop out of college to take care of your baby and try to figure out a life, the baby is a U.S. citizen. Very clearly as you can see that mother and child are a huge risk to national security. A person going to work and paying taxes while raising a kid and helping with the birthrate decline they supposedly care about is something we just can’t have.
That student is the the worst of the worst criminal.
The only moral way to fix the falling birthrate is to outlaw contraception and abortion, increase economic desperation to create a surge of underemployed young men, and increase the amount of anti-woman rhetoric and policy in popular culture and government.
You see, an increase in unemployment leads to an increase in baseline crime statistics, and an increase in dehumanizing and hateful attitudes towards women increases the rate of rape, which is now harder to prosecute. Devoid of any options, the birth rate rises and in many cases women are forced by implicit circumstances to limit their lives in ways they would not otherwise choose.
It’s a tactic explored by the Romanians, but it didn’t pan out. Clearly they allowed too many exceptions for maternal well-being, birth defects, rape and incest.
If the only citizens are naturalized people, the country is 100% immigrants.
What do they think America is founded on?
A bunch of religous people who were welcomed into multiple countries but then got mad that everyone around them didn’t belive in their exact same religon they did so they found a new place and committed some genocide before building up a mythology about how they had to do it in order to flee religious persecution?
A mix of first generation immigrants, 2nd generation, 3rd generation, 4th generation, a few remaining natives.
100% first generation immigrants would be a major shift.
And if immigrants don’t need due process and can be sent to concentration camps then it’s really easy to make anyone disappear
If immigrants don’t get due process, then nobody gets due process.
You could arrest Bill Clinton and claim he’s an immigrant. If that means he doesn’t get due process, he can never prove he’s not an immigrant, and so he’s stuck in Guantanamo forever.
Boston witch hunt all over again.
That’s pretty much the plan imo
This was initially what was Donald’s EO and such, but blue states (of course) noticed he fucked up (imagine having so much money and you can’t have a better team looking over your shit), that they had to change it.
Now it states that parents in the US legally can have a kid and it will be a citizen. But not parents who’s here visiting and such. But what if a mom is an illegal and dad is legal? What would the kid be?
But what if a mom is an illegal and dad is legal? What would the kid be?
How brown is their skin?
No … Not at all. This is just straight fear mongering.
The alternative to birthright is blood right or inheritance right.
Which is what the majority of the world uses. It’s only the America’s that use birth right generally.
For the most part it’s based on the blood lineage or parentage of the child. So regardless of where in the world you are born, or what borders you are in.
You get the same citizenship as your parents. Generally speaking, birthright citizenship has more issues and is more of a problem than the other methods.
Birthright is mostly used in the Americas because we were made up of colonies and for the most part you don’t leave the country you were born in back in the day. Unlike old world countries.
You may want to actually look a bit more into this. It sounds like you only are reading the panic and fear-mongering headlines.
What Trump is doing is f***** on many many levels. But the problem isn’t so much the ending of birthright citizenship itself. But the way he’s going about doing it, why he’s doing it and the lack of a proper replacement to a different system.
Hell realistically if things were done right with good intentions and through proper channels, switching from birthright to a different system could actually be and would likely be a net positive for America. Hell most of the Americas.
But instead we have a crazed lunatic doing it for the worst reasons and the worst way with no intent to switch to a different system for the betterment of the country.
But it’s been a big problem with this topic that people keep mixing up moral versus legal arguments as well as just general fear-mongering versus actual proper reasoned issues.
This is all f***** and shouldn’t be happening, but you need to call a spade a Spade or you only hurt yourself and your own argument
Lest we forget:
Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1:
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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Pretty hard to argue that “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” doesn’t mean what it clearly states. It’s not even in legalese. The fact that this wasn’t laughed out of court says everything.
It is just a fucking piece of paper.
If the judges and politicians and police don’t care and no one else can do anything then it means nothing.
It is this or bloody revolution and that would lead to the US being invaded by multiple other countries and shit getting worse and worse.
North Korea of America is where we are now.
Uggh. I can work out whether to upvote you for the accurate summary of the source of law & state power or downvote you for the utter idiocy of the invasion statement.
Russia can’t - they’re struggling to take over a country a fifth their size and have burnt through their Soviet stockpiles.
UK & EU certainly won’t invade, at most they’d send a peacekeeping force to protect civilians at a UN request (UN probably wouldnt pass it)
Canada will be stretched just keeping fighting out of its borders.
Mexico might just on principle (payback’s a bitch) but has bugger all capacity.
Same for South American Asian and African countries.
That leaves China, and if you think the Chinese are stupid enough to insert themselves in your civil war and create a sole enemy for both sides to fight you have zero understanding of the Chinese strategy.
The Chinese will wait for you all to decimate the country and each other, then come in and buy up the bits they want. Oh and invade Taiwan while y’all are busy destroying your country.
Putin’s plan to destroy the US has worked magnificently.
Canada will be stretched just keeping fighting out of its borders.
Canada just needs to send one guy over to say “you should be our eleventh province” and most of New England will say “yes please, I’m sick of whatever shit the regressives are doing now”
Mexico might just on principle (payback’s a bitch) but has bugger all capacity.
More accurately, we literally can’t be bothered. Our state of affairs doesn’t allow for a war, and by that, I mean that a huge national protest would ensue, and many politicians would strike it down for many reasons. Nobody here is interested, and after fighting narcos for so long, we’d rather have peace & quiet.
It is this or bloody revolution and that would lead to the US being invaded by multiple other countries and shit getting worse and worse.
No other nations are going to be invading the US, let alone multiple of them. They don’t have the logistics for it.
Other nations wouldn’t invade. But in the event of a civil war, you can be certain they would be sending in plenty of heavy weaponry.
Or the desire, who the hell would want to try a hostile occupation of the US ?
who the hell would want to try a hostile occupation of the US ?
This administration, it seems.
Why bother? The US is doing just fine destroying itself.
That’s technically not what they ruled on
No state shall…but the feds can?
He controls the feds. He’s certainly not stopping himself.
That’s what the Constitution says, and Trump now has nothing that can legally stop him from doing it.
Which means the Constitution is dead letter.
That goes both ways, and states need to start acting on it. They need to start passing a flurry of laws criminalizing ICE tactics. Pass laws making it a felony to:
-
Conduct law enforcement while masked
-
To search homes without a warrant
-
To enter various protected locations for law enforcement purposes when there isn’t an immediate threat.
They need to take cues from the anti-abortion playbook. Pass a law requiring all immigration detainees be transported in limousines. Require ICE to old prisoners in five star hotels. Require immigration officers to have at least two doctoral degrees. Make it a felony to do immigration enforcement without doing these things. Just start writing dozens of crazy laws criminalizing every aspect of ICE’s operations. Then let the individual ICE agents try and challenge them individually.
Better than that remove all immunity from law enforcement officers if…
They do not have a signed judicial warrant.
They do not verbally and visually identify themselves and the branch or organization they work for.
Without those two things, they cannot be verified as law enforcement acting in official capacity, and they should be treated as regular civilians. If a bunch of regular Joes jump out of a can and try to black bag you, you should have the right to defend yourself with lethal force.
I would go even further. A masked individual tries to abduct people? It’s perfectly legal for anyone to shoot them dead right on the spot. Law enforcement who dress like human traffickers should be put in the ground like human traffickers.
-
They haven’t decided on the legality of it yet. They just decided that courts cannot issue universal injunctions. They can only stop it at a case by case level for those who are suing. If they decide it’s unconstitutional, then it’ll have to stop nationally, but a lot of damage can be done before then. I think they’ll decide in October…
I’m looking forward to fucktons of individual suits absolutely slamming the courts every time an EO is issued. crowdfund the filing fees. turn petitions into copypasta. DDoS the Court system. they literally asked for this.
I’d support this. Build an AI tool that’ll take care of it for you.
I saw a person trying to all caps “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” screaming that this specific clause somehow is the piece that excludes birthright citizenship because something something loyalty to other countries?
So like …kids of illegal aliens are … sovereign citizens?
I think the argument was that if your parents are not naturalized citizens, then that means they’re not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’. So like, if the parents ‘owe allegiance’ to their previous country then it makes the kid a citizen of the parents’ original country, and not the U.S.
But it’s all actually bullshit to try and justify not wanting brown people to be U.S. Citizens tbh.
The problem is and has always been “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”
People have been twisting that to mean that anyone that isn’t born to American citizen parents means that you are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
Funny because that sounds to me like the "illegals"can’t be illegal then. Sounds like they’re not subject to the law anymore.
Yeah, this is the thing that’s ignored because it would let the whole narrative collapse.
Either you can’t deport them because they’re American citizens, or you can’t deport them because they’re not subject to your laws anyway. But in the end, this would just lead to (more) unlawful / illegal deportations.
I mean, the 2nd amendment is clearly only about militias, but you can see how that went.
States need to criminalize the behavior of ICE officers and start arresting them en masse. ICE agents will be free to challenge their imprisonment individually.
