An executive order would kick-start a legal fight that could lead to a Supreme Court ruling.

Summary

Donald Trump has pledged to end birthright citizenship through an executive order if re-elected, targeting the 14th Amendment’s provision that grants citizenship to all born in the U.S.

Critics argue this policy would defy the Constitution, specifically its post-Civil War intent to ensure citizenship for former slaves.

Legal experts widely agree that the Amendment’s language includes children born to undocumented parents, but Trump’s proposal could lead to an immediate legal battle.

The policy would require federal agencies to verify parents’ immigration status, complicating access to Social Security numbers and passports for U.S.-born children.

    • samus12345@lemmy.worldEnglish
      8·
      10 months ago

      Will there be enough Republicans in the House and Senate to pass laws like that without Democrat support? All they’ll have is a simple majority in both.

      SCROTUS “reinterpreting” all the laws is the fascists’ best bet, I think.

      • gdog05@lemmy.world
        4·
        10 months ago

        Those Democrats have careers and families they care about. It doesn’t take much pressure to own a few of them. Especially without checks and balances and add in some bootlicking appointees to the three letter agencies.

        • samus12345@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          10 months ago

          They’d need more than a few, though, more like dozens. It’ll just be all-out fascism without even a pretense of legitimacy at that point.

          • gdog05@lemmy.world
            3·
            10 months ago

            I’m pretty certain all out fascism is what we’re going to have. A handful of Democrats are not enough to hold democracy together. I don’t think it will be long before there’s not even a pretense of that being the case.

    • Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world
      4·
      10 months ago

      Considering it’s how his followers already use their Bible, we can assume they have the same level of “reverence” for the constitution.

    • SeattleRain@lemmy.worldEnglish
      41·
      10 months ago

      To be fair the 14th amendment was really only intended to give freed slaves citizenship. Which is something I’m sure the Supreme Court will cite as part of “original intent” they justify so many rulings with.

        • SeattleRain@lemmy.worldEnglish
          01·
          10 months ago

          So were the 1800’s wave of European immigrants, that most white americans descended from, mostly naturalized or did they just use the 14th amendment too? I’m not be factious, I actually don’t know but always assumed it was the former.

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.todayEnglish
      2·
      10 months ago

      The 14th amendment does not say it only applies to certain people or under certain circumstances.

      It does have one circumstance:

      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.

      I’m trying to figure out how they will argue that immigrants are not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”.

      • roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        1·
        10 months ago

        I’ve only heard that applied to foreign diplomats. Because the parents have diplomatic immunity, they and their children aren’t “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

      • evatronic@lemm.eeEnglish
        1·
        10 months ago

        If they aren’t, then border patrol would have no grounds to detain them. ICE could not deport them…

    • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      11·
      10 months ago

      The only hope I hold onto is that we need a constitutional convention anyway. If this convinces states to actually trigger an Article 5 convention, then I’m all for it.