• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Patrick Klepek

Editor at Remap, Crossplay
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
669
Near Chicago
2/3s of both houses & 38 states to ratify a change.

Ain't happening, y'all.


Sets up a precedent. Next Dem president will EO the 2nd amendment. It won't fly.
Doubtful that's how it would play out. Presuming Trump is actually planning this—I don't think he is, but let's game it out—the smarter strategy is to push an executive order forward, and wait for a challenge in the courts. Appeal it to the Supreme Court, and press your luck. They might lose, but I don't think that's assured.
 

EnronERA

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,056
Trump knows he can't actually do this, its just election theatre. Oh i'm gonna do it! Get out there and vote, anyone that cares about immigration! Get fired up! And then 4 months later nothing has happened because he can't do it because it isn't constitutional.
 

JealousKenny

Banned
Jul 17, 2018
1,231
User Banned (5 Days): Continued pattern of inflammatory drive-bys in sensitive topics
This is a policy I agree with. Birth tourism needs to end.
 

Carbon

Deploying the stealth Cruise Missile
Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,846
Which arguments are those?
That's a whole other rabbit hole to go down, but briefly, the US is no longer the open and unfettered (thanks to us screwing over the indians) land of opportunity it once was. That's not where the 14th amendment came from of course, but I think it's relevant to the discussion in 2018, when considering our history as an immigrant nation.

But it doesn't matter, because getting this country unified around ANYTHING is almost literally impossible now. Certainly nowhere near unified enough to pass a constitutional amendment.
 

Sheepinator

Member
Jul 25, 2018
27,946
An invertebrate masquerading as a human.
Scientists Baffled by McConnell and Ryan's Ability to Stand Upright Without Spines

Calling it a "medical mystery of the first order," scientists are baffled by the ability of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan to stand upright without the benefit of spines.

Doctors at the University of Minnesota Medical School, who have been studying the skeletal structures of both Republicans for months, believe that their ability to stand, walk, and even break into a brisk trot when confronted by reporters' questions is "virtually inexplicable."

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/bor...ryans-ability-to-stand-upright-without-spines
 

Deleted member 907

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,300
You're literally putting words in my mouth. I never said or even hinted at it not being racist. The opposite is the case. Please, learn to read, and don't put words in my mouth.
Maybe you should re-read your posts that said how the Chinese Exclusion Act isn't ethnic cleansing and how ethnic cleansing isn't inherently racist or discriminatory instead of trying to insult people.
 

Mona

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
26,151
This is a policy I agree with. Birth tourism needs to end.

giphy.gif


Shit human agrees with shit policy.

Besides, aren't you an eventual product of birth tourism having stolen the North Americas from the indigenous peoples?

shhh, we dont talk about that
 

Maxina

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
3,308
So he really is the anti-christ...

I truly believe that. No human being could be as vile as this man and not be the anti-christ.
The bible describes the anti-christ as being dangerously charismatic, to the point that almost the whole world begans to blindly follow him. So no, completely opposite of Trump who is catering to a certain group of people while pissing off the other.
 

Ogre

Member
Mar 26, 2018
435
This is, of course, a bald faced attempt to rally the base.

Even if SCOTUS could vote on this very thing tomorrow, the chance of it being upheld is literally 0%.

Unfortunately, neither of these facts addresses future attempts at undermining the 14th Amendmeent. The fact that Republicans have been focused on installing conservative justices, with ever increasing disassociation from adherence to basic legal and civic principles, should be a thing that is focused on heavily.
 

0VERBYTE

Banned
Nov 1, 2017
5,555
Birth tourism? By rich people you mean?
I mean, oh yeah, lots of undocumented migrants spending thousands of dollars to go to the US without visas only to then become indebted to whatever hospital they give birth in by dozens of thousands of dollars. Totally plausible. Stop pulling tales from your ass.
Birth tourism, never heard it phrased that way before.
 

NoKisum

Member
Nov 11, 2017
4,913
DMV Area, USA
Someone enlighten me, because I'm thrown off a bit by the phrasing.

So this means, if passed, the government can pick and choose who's actually a citizen and who's not, even if you've stayed in the country your entire life?
 

Metallix87

User Requested Self-Ban
Banned
Nov 1, 2017
10,533
Maybe you should re-read your posts that said how the Chinese Exclusion Act isn't ethnic cleansing and how ethnic cleansing isn't inherently racist or discriminatory instead of trying to insult people.
I never said ethnic cleansing wasn't racist. I said something can be racist while also not being ethnic cleansing, the legit opposite of what you're suggesting. So again, the reading comprehension issue is wholly on your side and not mine.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,859
USA, Sol 3, Universe 1
The most surprising thing Is the timing on this to me. I would have expected The President to talk up an English as the sole official language of the nation excecutive order before this.

Yeah, I'm not learned enough to form a full opinion on the ramifications and pros and cons on this, I only know the basics. When I have time after election research, I will seek more knowledge from those more learned than I on such legal matters though, this is intriguing.

Lol @ Ted Cruz talking this up though. To think, we might have had a Canadian as U.S. President. Much love to you Canada, I respect y'all, but a Canadian doesn't belong in the White House.
Someone enlighten me, because I'm thrown off a bit by the phrasing.

So this means, if passed, the government can pick and choose who's actually a citizen and who's not, even if you've stayed in the country your entire life?
Not quite. Basically, (assuming I understand the basics correctly) if such a thing were enacted, at the very least for legal permanent residents in the United States and U.S. Cirizens who have children on U.S. soil, those said children would be U.S. Citizens.
 

mikeys_legendary

The Fallen
Sep 26, 2018
3,008
It gives people we hate citizenship. And it feeds into the narrative that WE did it the right way. Self congratulation and racism.

That's what this is all about.
Like I said, I was willing to hear the poster out. Maybe there was a good reason I was unaware of.

But judging by his lack of answers, I'm going to speculate that you have hit the nail on the head.
 

Piggus

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,690
Oregon
I would say that Trump is insulting the intelligence of his base by proposing something so blatantly illegal and unconstitutional, but then I realize that his base are the dumbest motherfuckers alive and he can say anything he wants to them to get them riled up. Thank god I don't live around these stupid fucks, because I'd fear for the safety of my wife (an immigrant) if I did.
 

MetatronM

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,851
this will happen

1. EO nullifying Constitution regarding ius soli
2. goes to supreme court
3. kavanaugh and gorsuch oblige
4. EO are now superior to constitution
5. EO nullifying... freedom of press?
Steps 1 through 3 are what would happen, but step 4 is not why. There's a path to rule in Trump's favor that doesn't involve trying to argue that an EO can directly overrule the Constitution.

A ruling on the 14th Amendment if Trump tried to do this ridiculous thing would be centered around specifically this part of the sentence granting birthright citizenship:

"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."

What that clause is there for is to specifically exclude the children of foreign diplomats, who are for the most part outside of the jurisdiction of the United States (hence diplomatic immunity), or the children of a hypothetical foreign army that has invaded American soil. That way if, say, the Mexicans invaded Texas and sent up military bases on US soil, the children of those soldiers would not automatically become US citizens.

The white supremacist argument is that because illegal immigrants are an invading force and are not authorized to be here they qualify as being not under the jurisdiction of the United States. That's a nonsensical interpretation of the text, of course, but it's what they're going with. All they have to do is make the Court agree with their bizarre redefinition of jurisdiction (which would mean breaking with precedent), and the executive order would be perfectly legal and in court-approved compliance with the Constitution.

When Trump says "they" are telling him he can change this with an executive order, this is precisely the scenario that "they" are envisioning.
 

KHarvey16

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,193
Do Gorsuch and Kavanaugh have previous cases related to the interpretation of the constitution regarding birthright citizenship?