The Trump Presidency 2.0

[Devildoc]

I am firmly against Trump trying to remove birthright citizenship. To me, it’s one of the things that has made America great—the fact that it’s not blood that makes us American, but our belief in this country’s ideals. No matter who you are or where you come from, you can become something amazing in this country. We are, to me, a tribe of tribes, and if we take that away, I feel we would lose something truly special.

That is the spirit for which it was intended, but has ramifications and consequences that the founding fathers could not possibly envision. I admire you for having that spirit.

The 15 year-old Latina who is dumped across the border in order to give birth, knowing the child gets the bennies of being American and cannot be deported has very much changed my now very cynical perspective on this. American birth tourism is a thing.

 

[amlove21]

That is the spirit for which it was intended, but has ramifications and consequences that the founding fathers could not possibly envision. I admire you for having that spirit.

The 15 year-old Latina who is dumped across the border in order to give birth, knowing the child gets the bennies of being American and cannot be deported has very much changed my now very cynical perspective on this. American birth tourism is a thing.

The 14th Amendment issue is very interesting to look at. From the Wong vs US ruling (that actually addressed children of lawful permanent residents and not those here illegally), to the intent of the 14th- it'll be interesting on how this plays out. FTR, I think this one is logically solid in theory and for what the intent of the Amendment was meant to do, however, in practice birthright citizenship as we know it won't change. I think it's wasted effort.

The phrase most in question is "subject to the jurisdiction thereof"... if you're here illegally, you aren't under the jurisdiction as such, you're under the jurisdiction and laws of your home country. There are already exemptions in the ruling (enemy combatants, foreign dignitaries), and the EO, as written, clarifies and expands those categories.

If you're Canadian going on vacation to the Bahamas and have a layover at JFK, and during that layover you have a baby- that baby is American thanks to the 14th, right?

That's the argument from the folks arguing for what birthright citizenship has become, not the intent of those who wrote it. It's also super fun to see the left try and square the circle of saying things like "Borders and citizenship are just imaginary lines on a map and a construct" and then argue for those magical lines to count and citizenship to be applied.

 

[Locksteady]

I am firmly against Trump trying to remove birthright citizenship. To me, it’s one of the things that has made America great—the fact that it’s not blood that makes us American, but our belief in this country’s ideals. No matter who you are or where you come from, you can become something amazing in this country. We are, to me, a tribe of tribes, and if we take that away, I feel we would lose something truly special.

I suppose the question for you (and any others who'd like to chime in) is:

Do you feel the historical material incentive for unrestricted birthright citizenship, which for the US and the rest of the Western Hemisphere included populating vast swathes of newly claimed territory and providing sufficient manpower to maximize industrial growth, is (or could ever be) reduced enough to justify joining the rest of world outside of the WH by introducing basic caveats to address emerging second-order concerns?

 

[Devildoc]

The 14th Amendment issue is very interesting to look at. From the Wong vs US ruling (that actually addressed children of lawful permanent residents and not those here illegally), to the intent of the 14th- it'll be interesting on how this plays out. FTR, I think this one is logically solid in theory and for what the intent of the Amendment was meant to do, however, in practice birthright citizenship as we know it won't change. I think it's wasted effort.

The phrase most in question is "subject to the jurisdiction thereof"... if you're here illegally, you aren't under the jurisdiction as such, you're under the jurisdiction and laws of your home country. There are already exemptions in the ruling (enemy combatants, foreign dignitaries), and the EO, as written, clarifies and expands those categories.

If you're Canadian going on vacation to the Bahamas and have a layover at JFK, and during that layover you have a baby- that baby is American thanks to the 14th, right?

That's the argument from the folks arguing for what birthright citizenship has become, not the intent of those who wrote it. It's also super fun to see the left try and square the circle of saying things like "Borders and citizenship are just imaginary lines on a map and a construct" and then argue for those magical lines to count and citizenship to be applied.

"Subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is the key point, and I agree with your interpretation. I'll be very curious to see how the courts rule.

 

[Cookie_]

The phrase most in question is "subject to the jurisdiction thereof"... if you're here illegally, you aren't under the jurisdiction as such, you're under the jurisdiction and laws of your home country. There are already exemptions in the ruling (enemy combatants, foreign dignitaries), and the EO, as written, clarifies and expands those categories.

I'm willing to bet this is how the Supreme Court will interpret it once it gets up to them.

The 2nd category in the EO (lawful but temporary) is what might not stand up in court.

 

[ThunderHorse]

Honestly, there needs to be tighter controls on Jus Soli, if you are born to someone who does not have legal status, neither should you. The amount of people flowing over our border right now is insane. The amount of people who buy holiday packages to shit out a child in an American hospital so that they have an anchor is also insane, they're just wealthy. The Supreme Court has made it legal previously to deny citizenship to those born of foreign diplomats in United States v. Wong Kim Ark - Wikipedia

 

[Topkick]

Like the "right to bear arms", it seems like the interpretation is up to whomever is in charge whenever the interpretation is up for debate...

That's the issue. "We the people" are supposed to be in charge.

 

[Devildoc]

So....Hegseth is being Kavanaughed, again. A democrat senator has an affidavit from his (I think) sister-in-law that he was abusive to his wife.

Of course, no mention of this in the past whatsoever, not even during the confirmation hearing.

 

[TLDR20]

So....Hegseth is being Kavanaughed, again. A democrat senator has an affidavit from his (I think) sister-in-law that he was abusive to his wife.

Of course, no mention of this in the past whatsoever, not even during the confirmation hearing.

I think him being an infantry officer with no Ranger tab is the most offensive thing about him.

 

[Marauder06]

I think granting citizenship to the children of non-citizens simply because their parents choose to have them here is ridiculous. If the parents are citizens, their children are. If the parents aren't, the kids aren't.

Room for nuance in things like one citizen and one non-citizen parent and maybe green card holders.

I also don't like dual citizenship. You're one person, you get one national citizenship.

I now reasonable people will disagree.

 

[RackMaster]

I'm all for restricting birthright citizenship, it's abused in Canada as well.

While the U.S. and Canada are the only two NATO countries with birthright citizenship. twelve others have restricted policies: Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

The other 18 countries have no such policy at all: Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Turkey.

Similar trends extend further east, with some countries offering restricted birthright citizenship and others lacking it altogether. Ukraine and Israel both have restricted birthright citizenship, as do Egypt, Sudan, Iran, Pakistan and India.

Restricted birthright citizenship exists in some countries in the Indo-Pacific region — including Thailand, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Taiwan and Cambodia – but is lacking in other countries in the region.

China and Russia — two of the top U.S. adversaries — lack such a policy.

https://thehill.com/policy/international/5030514-trump-end-birthright-citizenship/

 

[Topkick]

I think it’s kind of crappy they they lit “not properly securing the border“ on her, I mean, what was she supposed to do?

I'm not sure what the problem is but find it hard to understand recruiting problems for the Coast Guard. Apparently they are short of personnel too. I'd think it would be a pretty cool job and no shortage of people interested in doing it.

 

[Devildoc]

I also don't like dual citizenship. You're one person, you get one national citizenship.

This has always been perplexing to me. I know 2 people with US-Israeli citizenship, both left the US in October to go back in the Israeli military. Makes no sense.

 

[amlove21]

Birthright citizenship is going to be interesting.
Read the initial arguments for and against.
Then see if you find the case (Chinese guy whose name I don't remember V The U.S. Government). That case established the born in the US = citizen president.

Wong Kim. Born to legally-here Chinese immigrants in America, this precedence was widely (and in my opinion) broadly applied to illegal immigrants in practice.

 

[AWP]

Word from our leadership via email is the DoD is exempt from the hiring freeze and we're waiting on the wordsmiths to finalize the memorandum.

 

[Dame]

I'm not sure what the problem is but find it hard to understand recruiting problems for the Coast Guard. Apparently they are short of personnel too. I'd think it would be a pretty cool job and no shortage of people interested in doing it.

USCG is always short of personnel. They have no budget and no respect. What they did have was pissed away by Admiral Papp. During the cuts from 2013 the Coast Guard’s acquisition budget for FY ’14 was about $900 million versus around $1.5 billion in FY ’13. Add the personnel cuts, the operational mission cuts, the insane level of risk aversion, and the fact that it is a serious mind fuck at boot.

Coast Guard cutbacks will cost 1,000 jobs

 

[RackMaster]

Well this is awkward.

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[RackMaster]

And in case anyone is wondering why Trump is pushing tariffs so hard on Canada.

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[Kraut783]

This has always been perplexing to me. I know 2 people with US-Israeli citizenship, both left the US in October to go back in the Israeli military. Makes no sense.

Did they have to do their conscription service, or lose their Israeli citizenship?

All of the US hostages in Gaza were Israelis who lived in Israel and had US citizenship. It irritated me when the media would harp on the US hostages in Gaza.

 

[Kraut783]

"I also don't like dual citizenship. You're one person, you get one national citizenship."

Agree, you should only have one citizenship that you swear allegiance to.