zakuivcustom wrote:DeltaMD90 wrote:Maybe the executive order is to make all illegal immigrants "diplomats", therefore ending birthright citizenship?
But that doesn't do anything to the "birth tourism", though. It's one thing to argue that illegal immigrants are not "under jurisdiction" (Which, well, is not even true), it's another thing to argue that people on nonimmigrant visa to US are not "under jurisdiction" of US (Then I guess they can break whatever laws they want?).
And actually, with diplomatic immunity, that means those so-call "illegal immigrants" cannot be deport by US. Be careful of what you wish for
P.S. And Drumpf is already saying "let the supreme court decide" anyway, just like what everyone predicted. But wait, only yesterday that he was arguing that he can literally use a EO to take away the citizenship rights.
He can write an EO, and when people sue him about that, it would go to the courts.
I don't know anything about constitutional law, but this phrase probably did not mean "any person born in the US is a citizen" at the time it was written. In today's English, that is what it means. But that is an informal practice (NOT a change in the law) that happened in around the 1960s. Prior to that, people did not consider any person born in the US is automatically a citizen. The 14th Amendment existed for 1 century before people interpreted it that way.
Perhaps it is more appropriate for an actual law to change than for interpretation to change. Because that's the problem here - if it is only an interpretation, then Trump, as commander in chief, can of course update that interpretation.
As I noted in another thread, approx. 39% of Americans agree that the birthright citizenship practice (which didn't start happening with the 14th Amendment) needs to be reconsidered. Of that ~39%, probably a majority are Republican voters, but I have seen plenty of liberal commentary on this in the past. Clinton and Obama gave rousing speeches against illegal immigration in the past.
This project is a fringe position within the powerful people / intelligentsia, but not among Republican voters. Well over 50% of them probably support this, and the Supreme Court could conceivably support an EO based on the history of the 14th Amendment.
Agreed with Kaitak... this is clear Stephen Miller. You can tell his fingerprints are on it.