Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 253

Thread: Trump to terminate birthright citizenship

  1. #1

    Trump to terminate birthright citizenship

    https://www.axios.com/trump-birthrig...1fd72ea82.html


    Exclusive: Trump to terminate birthright citizenship

    President Trump plans to sign an executive order that would remove the right to citizenship for babies of non-citizens and unauthorized immigrants born on U.S. soil, he said yesterday in an exclusive interview for "Axios on HBO," a new four-part documentary news series debuting on HBO this Sunday at 6:30 p.m. ET/PT.

    Why it matters: This would be the most dramatic move yet in Trump's hardline immigration campaign, this time targeting "anchor babies" and "chain migration." And it will set off another stand-off with the courts, as Trump’s power to do this through executive action is debatable to say the least.

    Trump told "Axios on HBO" that he has run the idea of ending birthright citizenship by his counsel and plans to proceed with the highly controversial move, which certainly will face legal challenges.
    "It was always told to me that you needed a constitutional amendment. Guess what? You don't," Trump said, declaring he can do it by executive order.

    When told that's very much in dispute, Trump replied: "You can definitely do it with an Act of Congress. But now they're saying I can do it just with an executive order."

    "We're 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," Trump continued. "It's ridiculous. It's ridiculous. And it has to end."
    "It's in the process. It'll happen ... with an executive order."

    The president expressed surprise that "Axios on HBO" knew about his secret plan: "I didn't think anybody knew that but me. I thought I was the only one. "

    Behind the scenes: "Axios on HBO" had been working for weeks on a story on Trump’s plans for birthright citizenship, based on conversations with several sources, including one close to the White House Counsel’s office.

    The legal challenges would force the courts to decide on a constitutional debate over the 14th Amendment, which 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."

    Be smart: Few immigration and constitutional scholars believe it is within the president's power to change birthright citizenship, former U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services chief counsel Lynden Melmed tells Axios.

    But some conservatives have argued that the 14th Amendment was only intended to provide citizenship to children born in the U.S. to lawful permanent residents — not to unauthorized immigrants or those on temporary visas.

    John Eastman, a constitutional scholar and director of Chapman University's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, told "Axios on HBO" that the Constitution has been misapplied over the past 40 or so years. He says the line "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" originally referred to people with full, political allegiance to the U.S. — green card holders and citizens.

    Michael Anton, a former national security official in the Trump administration, recently took up this argument in the Washington Post.
    Anton said that Trump could, via executive order, "specify to federal agencies that the children of noncitizens are not citizens" simply because they were born on U.S. soil. (It’s not yet clear whether Trump will take this maximalist argument, though his previous rhetoric suggests there’s a good chance.)

    But others — such as Judge James C. Ho, who was appointed by Trump to Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, in New Orleans — say the line in the amendment refers to the legal obligation to follow U.S. laws, which applies to all foreign visitors (except diplomats) and immigrants. He has written that changing how the 14th Amendment is applied would be "unconstitutional."

    Between the lines: Until the 1960s, the 14th Amendment was never applied to undocumented or temporary immigrants, Eastman said.
    Between 1980 and 2006, the number of births to unauthorized immigrants — which opponents of birthright citizenship call "anchor babies" — skyrocketed to a peak of 370,000, according to a 2016 study by Pew Research. It then declined slightly during and following the Great Recession.
    The Supreme Court has already ruled that children born to immigrants who are legal permanent residents have citizenship. But those who claim the 14th Amendment should not apply to everyone point to the fact that there has been no ruling on a case specifically involving undocumented immigrants or those with temporary legal status.

    The bottom line: If Trump follows through on the executive order, "the courts would have to weigh in in a way they haven't," Eastman said.
    The full interview will air on "Axios on HBO" this Sunday, Nov. 4, at 6:30 p.m. ET/PT.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    He says it, now lets wait for him to actually sign the EO. Trump says a lot of things that he has no plans of doing, so we wait until for his actions.

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    He says it, now lets wait for him to actually sign the EO. Trump says a lot of things that he has no plans of doing, so we wait until for his actions.

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    He says it, now lets wait for him to actually sign the EO. Trump says a lot of things that he has no plans of doing, so we wait until for his actions.
    I think he will, he gave the same type of answer as he did on association health care plans. Where he had it researched heavily before jumping in. I don't need to see any polling to know that its a winning position for him, support-wise with the American people.

  6. #5
    I don't think an E.O. can overrule the 14th amendment to the constitution. But who am I?

  7. #6
    Can he make it retroactive?
    "The Patriarch"

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by dean.engelhardt View Post
    I don't think an E.O. can overrule the 14th amendment to the constitution. But who am I?
    It won't. It will simply set the definition of "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". The argument, which is Ron Paul's argument as well, is that illegals and their children are NOT subject to the jurisdiction, and are therefore ineligible for automatic citizenship.

  9. #8
    If Trump can remove 14th Amendment rights by E.O., can the next Democratic President remove 2nd amendment rights by E.O.? Please don't throw away the constitution and our bill of rights in the name on immigration. This is a double edge sword. The power of the presidency last long after Trump moves on.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by dean.engelhardt View Post
    If Trump can remove 14th Amendment rights by E.O., can the next Democratic President remove 2nd amendment rights by E.O.? Please don't throw away the constitution and our bill of rights in the name on immigration. This is a double edge sword. The power of the presidency last long after Trump moves on.
    Again, this wont be removing the 14th amendment, it will be a matter of finally adjudicating what it means. As has already been done many times in regards to the 2nd amendment.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by dean.engelhardt View Post
    If Trump can remove 14th Amendment rights by E.O., can the next Democratic President remove 2nd amendment rights by E.O.? Please don't throw away the constitution and our bill of rights in the name on immigration. This is a double edge sword. The power of the presidency last long after Trump moves on.
    In this context it would only remove 2nd amendment rights from illegals.
    "The Patriarch"

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by dean.engelhardt View Post
    If Trump can remove 14th Amendment rights by E.O., can the next Democratic President remove 2nd amendment rights by E.O.? Please don't throw away the constitution and our bill of rights in the name on immigration. This is a double edge sword. The power of the presidency last long after Trump moves on.
    Birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens was never the intent with the 14th Amendment. It was for the children of former slaves.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    In this context it would only remove 2nd amendment rights from illegals.
    What about an EO "clarifying" what "necessary to the security of a free State" means?
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Pinochet is the model
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Liberty preserving authoritarianism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Enforced internal open borders was one of the worst elements of the Constitution.

  15. #13
    Account Restricted. Admin to review account standing


    Posts
    28,739
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    He's crazy like a fox. The 9th circuit will intervene as always and then onto the SCOTUS. Say hello to Kavanaugh.

  16. #14
    Account Restricted. Admin to review account standing


    Posts
    28,739
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    No more Chinese and Latinos dropping off their spawn on U.S. territory. Gravy train will be closed.

  17. #15
    What's the argument in favor of birthright citizenship?

  18. #16
    Account Restricted. Admin to review account standing


    Posts
    28,739
    Join Date
    Feb 2009



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    No more Chinese and Latinos dropping off their spawn on U.S. territory. Gravy train will be closed.
    It isn't just them at all. The Russians are doing it as well. And I'm sure others as well.
    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...-miami-n836121

    and
    https://cis.org/Feere/Birth-Tourists-Come-Around-Globe

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    It won't. It will simply set the definition of "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". The argument, which is Ron Paul's argument as well, is that illegals and their children are NOT subject to the jurisdiction, and are therefore ineligible for automatic citizenship.
    Dammit! somehow I hit the neg rep button on this, when I wanted to go +. Somebody help me out here! Sorry about that specs, the dialog disappeared and reappeared and I just hit the rep button without checking.
    Last edited by fedupinmo; 10-30-2018 at 07:52 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Ryan
    In Washington you can see them everywhere: the Parasites and baby Stalins sucking the life out of a once-great nation.

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    It won't. It will simply set the definition of "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". The argument, which is Ron Paul's argument as well, is that illegals and their children are NOT subject to the jurisdiction, and are therefore ineligible for automatic citizenship.
    This.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    It won't. It will simply set the definition of "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". The argument, which is Ron Paul's argument as well, is that illegals and their children are NOT subject to the jurisdiction, and are therefore ineligible for automatic citizenship.
    +rep.

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    What about an EO "clarifying" what "necessary to the security of a free State" means?
    This will never happen.

    Because he doesnt know $#@! nor cares about the Constitution, individual liberties, downsizing government, eliminating agencies, cutting spending etc etc etc

    Thats the difference between Obama and Trump.

    Obama was evil. Trump is just retarded.
    Last edited by unknown; 10-30-2018 at 08:30 AM.
    "An idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government" - Ron Paul.

    "To learn who rules over you simply find out who you arent allowed to criticize."

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by unknown View Post
    This will never happen.

    Because he doesnt know $#@! nor cares about the Constitution, individual liberties, downsizing government, eliminating agencies, cutting spending etc etc etc
    You sir, are no lover of liberty.
    1. Don't lie.
    2. Don't cheat.
    3. Don't steal.
    4. Don't kill.
    5. Don't commit adultery.
    6. Don't covet what your neighbor has, especially his wife.
    7. Honor your father and mother.
    8. Remember the Sabbath and keep it Holy.
    9. Don’t use your Higher Power's name in vain, or anyone else's.
    10. Do unto others as you would have them do to you.

    "For the love of money is the root of all evil..." -- I Timothy 6:10, KJV

  26. #23
    That's sort of divergence from his general policy direction so far; on border Wall and other things he had been citing Israel has his model but seems he's not eager to follow Israel's birthright model also.

    Also, there's no indication that this talk a week before midterm elections is just red meat for the base as part of get the vote out campaign sort of like "middle class tax cut" trial baloon released few days ago.


    Related


    Poll: How much trust do you put in current President's promises and statements?

    No change in H-1B visa policy, says US official
    livemint
    Aug 31, 2018 - Washington: There is no change in the US' H-1B visa policy, which is ... that it does not disadvantage US workers or wages, a senior Trump ...

    Trump: I want to scrap all H1B visas








  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesiv1 View Post
    You sir, are no lover of liberty.
    I hate freeeeeeeeeeeedoooooommmmmmmmmm!!!!!!!!!
    "An idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government" - Ron Paul.

    "To learn who rules over you simply find out who you arent allowed to criticize."



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by dean.engelhardt View Post
    I don't think an E.O. can overrule the 14th amendment to the constitution. But who am I?
    I do not think that amendment is intended to give birthright citizenship to two illegal immigrant parents .
    Do something Danke

  30. #26
    Why are Puerto Ricans U.S. Citizens by Statute?

    This will make Congress finally clarify what was clarified when the amendment was being discussed.

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    What about an EO "clarifying" what "necessary to the security of a free State" means?
    There have been many executive orders on gun control
    I just want objectivity on this forum and will point out flawed sources or points of view at my leisure.

    Quote Originally Posted by spudea on 01/15/24
    Trump will win every single state primary by double digits.
    Quote Originally Posted by spudea on 04/20/16
    There won't be a contested convention
    Quote Originally Posted by spudea on 05/30/17
    The shooting of Gabrielle Gifford was blamed on putting a crosshair on a political map. I wonder what event we'll see justified with pictures like this.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by unknown View Post
    This will never happen.

    Because he doesnt know $#@! nor cares about the Constitution, individual liberties, downsizing government, eliminating agencies, cutting spending etc etc etc

    Thats the difference between Obama and Trump.

    Obama was evil. Trump is just retarded.
    + rep.
    "The Patriarch"

  33. #29
    Interesting. Ron Paul supported repealing birthright citizenship, but I don’t recall the details of how he wanted to do it.

    Best option would be a Constitutional Amendment. That’s a high hurdle, but worth pursuing.

    It seems like the courts are usually involved in interpreting the law, and constantly changing interpretation by activist courts is a problem. When the court has a wrong interpretation of the intent, is it not up to lawmakers to clarify?

    An executive order to change law is not constitutional at all.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    It won't. It will simply set the definition of "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". The argument, which is Ron Paul's argument as well, is that illegals and their children are NOT subject to the jurisdiction, and are therefore ineligible for automatic citizenship.
    Interesting idea. The meaning of that language at the time it was written is key. Has the definition been changed by activist courts since it was first adopted? Constitutionally, how is that supposed to be corrected?

    “Subject to the jurisdiction” is a double edged sword. Do non-citizens have the other rights guaranteed by the Constitution? Due process? No cruel and unusual punishment? IMHO, it should mean that anyone who is in the custody of US authorities is guaranteed those rights, with the exception of a war zone, where the Geneva Convention should apply.

    With regard to illegal border crossing, there should be a process, even if that process consists of turning them around at the border if they are not citizens or have no valid visa.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Birthright citizenship
    By TaftFan in forum U.S. Constitution
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 12-18-2018, 06:02 AM
  2. Hey, wow, Huck wants to end Birthright Citizenship!
    By uncloned21 in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 10-30-2018, 01:45 PM
  3. End birthright citizenship?
    By bc2208 in forum Ron Paul: On the Issues
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 10-30-2018, 01:44 PM
  4. Birthright Citizenship?
    By Brian4Liberty in forum Ron Paul: On the Issues
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 10-30-2018, 01:41 PM
  5. [VIDEO] Trump: End Birthright Citizenship
    By jj- in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 08-17-2015, 11:46 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •