Judge blocks Trumps EO to end birthright citizenship

[XponentialChaos]

Reagan-appointed judge.

 

[WEATHER53]

The Constitution is challenged in the SCOTUS daily…that’s what they do there. You honestly didn’t know that?

Knowledge non existent with this clown show racist

 

[Billiejeens]

It clearly states that being born in America, makes you an American.

It doesn't

 

[Slade3200]

Lol

The EO DOESNT take away any Constitutional right. Instead, you dolt, it seeks to clarify that the 14th does not apply and was never intended to apply to kids born here of illegal alien parents.

“That’s”

You’re a maroon.

The amendment didn’t state conditions around who the parents are. It clearly refers to those born here.

Now do I agree with it?? No, I don’t. But it should be fixed legislatively. Not by EO or by the courts

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I believe that Trump fully well anticipated that some knee jerk lib judge would try to label the EO “unconstitutional.”

You mean Judge Coughenour? He was appointed by Reagan you fucking dunce.

And I also believe it will soon end up in the SCOTUS.

Although there are arguments to be made on both sides of the matter, and the ultimate determination isn’t assured, it is certainly a very real possibility that “birthright citizenship” for babies born here to illegal aliens is going to get shut down.

There's nothing wrong with altering the rules for citizenship, but this is not the way to do it.

 

[Billiejeens]

Reagan-appointed judge.

And?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

And?

Ha, you'd not shrug it off like that if he'd been nominated by Obama, you fucking idiot.

 

[WEATHER53]

Broken down to the most basic-
When the mother is not a citizen and here illegally, does a baby she delivers magically make everything different and fine and citizenship conferred.
The answer if course is NO
BUT-Magic, hopes, wishes are a mainstay of liberal operations and decisions that they want Forced on everyone

 

[ThisIsMe]

To the discussion of this topic, I'd like to submit an article i found earlier today, which explains it quite well. Its kind of long but the meat of it is in the first half:

Birthright Citizenship: A Response to My Critics - Claremont Review of Books

claremontreviewofbooks.com

I'd like to see your thoughts on this.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Psst - Birthright citizenship was the norm since the country was created by the founders.

In the late 1700's there was no limit to immigration, if you came here and had children they were citizens.

(Except for diplomates of foreign countries not under the Jurisdiction of the United States.)

WW

Psst - This is about citizenship, not immigration. What made a citizen a citizen before ratification of the DOC?

 

[XponentialChaos]

And?

Not some lib judge.

 

[WEATHER53]

Jurisdiction to enforce the laws… not take away constitutional rights.

Jurisdiction in this case means already legally under the care and confines of the USA. Illegals are not such

 

[BrokeLoser]

Now do I agree with it?? No, I don’t. But it should be fixed legislatively. Not by EO or by the courts

There's nothing wrong with altering the rules for citizenship, but this is not the way to do it.

Just so we know we can take all the woke white guilt purple hair clowns seriously can you two link us to your previous posts showing that you denounced the Kenyan’s executive action / creation of DACA?

 

[blackhawk]

That’s what legal challenges are for let the two sides make their case and the courts can decide it.

 

[WEATHER53]

Psst - Birthright citizenship was the norm since the country was created by the founders.

In the late 1700's there was no limit to immigration, if you came here and had children they were citizens.

(Except for diplomates of foreign countries not under the Jurisdiction of the United States.)

WW

In the 1700s there was no designation of “illegal alien”. The real issue may be when was that distinction created and is IT legal?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Psst - This is about citizenship, not immigration. What made a citizen a citizen before ratification of the DOC?
View attachment 1069710

"Free" being the operative word, black people were considered property not people.

Going back even to that time free black person who had a baby, that baby was a citizen.

WW

 

[otto105]

It is unconstitutional based on the historic reading of the amendment.

If it has been incorrectly applied all these years, then-

We have learned that settled law doesn't mean what some folks think that it means.

Sure, because Heil Shitler! expects his "court" to be loyal to him and do his bidding.

 

[WorldWatcher]

In the 1700s there was no designation of “illegal alien”. The real issue may be when was that distinction created and is IT legal?

Correct, there wasn't. Any free person that came here could become a citizen, any children they had (even if the parents weren't citizens) was a citizen.

That's my point to those that go "well the founders ....", when this country was founded there were no illegal aliens.

WW

 

[Slade3200]

Jurisdiction in this case means already legally under the care and confines of the USA. Illegals are not such

We aren’t talking about illegals. We are talking about humans born on our soil

 

[Anathema]

This is when we need to start dragging these judges , administrators, and other bureaucratic pricks iff their benches and offices and into the street for a little re-education.