BREAKING: Here is Trump's unconstitutional order seeking to restrict birthright citizenship.
It takes effect in 30 days, but expect a challenge as early as tonight or tomorrow. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-the-meaning-and-value-of-american-citizenship/
It takes effect in 30 days, but expect a challenge as early as tonight or tomorrow. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-the-meaning-and-value-of-american-citizenship/
Comments
As many of us knew he would…
He is a corrupt criminal and should never have been allowed to run again - but Republicans are either cowards, complicit, co-conspirators or all of the above.
https://open.substack.com/pub/brianteal/p/is-project-2025-coming-to-fruition?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=el88k
Same as it ever was people. So, don't react like it's 2017. Oppose and Resist!
I sincerely hope GOP members of Congress reap what they’ve sown.
Even if he was to win, he couldn't be sworn in.
1. Trump’s executive order ending “birthright citizenship” is directly contrary to the 14th Amendment.
2. I have zero confidence in the 6 Justices who gave us Trump v. U.S. to uphold the plain meaning of the Constitution against the wishes of Donald Trump.
Tell them this-
“May not” means he doesn’t have permission.
“Cannot” means there is someone to stop him.
But we have lost the courts so there is no one left to prosecute him.
If there is no one to prosecute him, he “can” & he will.
And while this is obviously an atrocious Supreme Court, there have been times where they didn't side with him.
I think there is a good chance he doesn't tear up the 14th.
Any case brought to try and stop him will be shopped around or appealed until it gets in front of one of HIS judges who will delay it for years before finally dismissing it all together.
“Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it.” Replace “liberty” with “rule of law”, and it’s the same dynamic.
We still have to define "illegal" (border crossing?) and "temporary" (H-1B visa?). I don't believe an EO supercedes the 14th amendment, either. We need an amendment.
I think it is obviously bullshit, but ultimately SCOTUS can say whatever they want.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/travel-legal-considerations/us-citizenship/child-citizenship-act-of-2000.html#:~:text=Eligible%20children%20who%20were%20born,citizenship%20and%20a%20U.S.%20passport.
- Withdraws from Paris Climate Accords, more fossil fuel & mineral mining
- Withdraws from World Health Org
- Tariffs on Canada & Mexico, proposed 2/1
-Pardons over 1500 J6 attackers
-Country ban, likely reflecting Muslim Ban
-Renames Gulf of Mexico
As a practical matter, if SCOTUS is going to approve this they will need a test case that is not entirely abhorrent.
(Very) Serious question.
I don’t trust the SCOTUS to strike this down.
https://www.heritage.org/border-security/report/rising-the-ashes-principles-and-policies-new-american-immigration-system
That clause in the Constitution has always been interpreted to only except people here with diplomatic immunity, people on foreign ships, invading military forces, and sovereign native tribes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark#:~:text=Upholding%20the%20concept,U.S.%20jurisdiction).
So we have that.
https://youtu.be/tjlOIe6i4C4?si=q9tutnkVIYf9oSu5
It wasn’t too many years ago when SCOTUS said children born abroad of a US mother couldn’t be treated more favorably than children born abroad of a US father.