Trump plans to end birthright citizenship

[x65943]

What are your thoughts on Trump's plan to end birthright citizenship in the US?

He plans to do it by executive order - which most people think is not constitutionally possible.

Regardless of its feasibility at the moment, do you support this measure?

Dark blue = birthright citizenship
Intermediate blue = restrictions
light blue = abolished birthright citizenship
grey = no such system

As you can see the Americas are essentially on their own with unconditional birthright citizenship. Most other western nations have much more restrictive systems in place.

With documented cases of birth tourism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_tourism, some people think it's finally time to end the loophole.

Thoughts?

 

[the_randomizer]

What I want to know is, how is this somehow more criminal or "unfair" compared to other countries' restrictions on birthright citizenship?

 

[FAST6191]

I wonder if they do that will they also end the requirement for US citizens to file (and in some cases pay) taxes when not living in the country.

Anyway for now I will go with it is an amusing quirk of law, and while it is not unpopular in the US (I see several threads of US based legal logic greatly enjoy it and consider it a benefit) there also seem to be many other countries, ones of similar size, scope and problems faced, that are doing OK without it.

"loophole"
I am always wary of phrases using it. There are certainly, for want of a better term, "legitimate"* loopholes that might need closing but so often I see it used as a phrase to bypass thought and consideration of a subject. This is especially true in the UK where it is pretty much the main phrase.

*some exception gets explicitly made for a then notable group but then they fade from prominence and it becomes a loophole 30 years later. To that end it is probably as tricky as "civilised" in some cases.
Back on topic this I can not see being an unwarranted loophole, one born of a confluence of laws or legal quirks. It is an established part of US law, known to many and used by lots over many years.
To that end I await arguments for and against.

I should also note it goes beyond this -- someone sneaks in/overstays a visa/whatever and gives birth to someone. Many are then reluctant to deport the child's parents and make said child a ward of the state or subject one of their citizens to a hard life (here kid you are 14 with all the trappings of a US lifestyle and don't speak the language, might not even technically be a citizen of some war torn shithole, enjoy).

 

[AkikoKumagara]

I don't necessarily oppose changing the system, really, but rather that the acting president thinks he can violate the Constitution with executive orders.

 

[WD_GASTER2]

its interesting because, if it is done via executive order, because of its "wording" what is to stop the next guy to do the same to the second amendment via executive order as well? Just food for thought for conservatives.

I am just saying that this leaves the door open to a mess.

 

[Hanafuda]

There has been some disagreement for over 100 years over the exact meaning of the words, "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," in the 14th Amendment, whether this is inclusive of illegal aliens or not. Regardless, I don't think Trump is serious about this. He's trolling, and it's working. He's got people on the TV and all over the internet talking about this now, and that results in Democrats unambiguously advocating for open borders, limitless anchor babies, basically no restrictions on immigration whatsoever.

 

[Viri]

He won't do it. I agree birthright should be ended, but the correct way via congress.

Also, Trump knows how to play the media, and it's all working, just in time for the midterms. This is the same guy who pretty much got free publicity during the 2016 election. He pretty much knows how to fuck with the media.

 

[WD_GASTER2]

this sounds more like a gambit to me. Latino's are (statistically speaking) known to not show up and vote in large numbers. Who is to say that this may get them motivated? we will see.

 

[ZachSZ]

While I'm not opposed to him changing it, I don't like that he's trying to do it via executive order. I just don't like the idea that something could be potentially changed in the constitution by a single person with no input from anyone else with an executive order. It should be interesting though as there are legal experts saying he doesn't have the power to do it via executive order and some saying he does.

 

[Pluupy]

I wonder how many born citizens would be able to do the citizenship test...? Specifically Civics. I remember when my dad was studying for the test. I didn't know the answers to some of the questions.

If anyone interested in what kind of questions are asked, here is the study guide they give to people:
https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship/learners/study-test/study-materials-civics-test

People who are 65 or older get very simple questions like what is the first amendment and who is the current president. I think that is nice.

 

[Yepi69]

Damn, and here I thought Trump was imposing a limit on if couples should be allowed to have kids or not.

 

[Hanafuda]

People who are 65 or older get very simple questions like what is the first amendment and who is the current president. I think that is nice.

Why is it nice? Nearly all immigrants seeking to naturalize as citizens into a new country after they're already over 65 will never contribute to the big money pile (tax revenues, including social security) ... but they'll almost certainly draw from it.

As for 'birthright citizenship' .. it's an issue but not the biggest one. Personally I think chain migration is a worse policy.

 

[Pluupy]

Why is it nice? Nearly all immigrants seeking to naturalize as citizens into a new country after they're already over 65 will never contribute to the big money pile (tax revenues, including social security) ... but they'll almost certainly draw from it.

As for 'birthright citizenship' .. it's an issue but not the biggest one. Personally I think chain migration is a worse policy.

It's nice because you can't possibly expect someone at that age to learn so much of US history. It's not really important. They get core questions relevant to the United States (and Martin Luther King Jr) and that's it. Whether they contribute or not is your own opinion. My grandma worked when she came to the US and contributes just as much as any jackass my age walking around.

 

[x65943]

Why is it nice? Nearly all immigrants seeking to naturalize as citizens into a new country after they're already over 65 will never contribute to the big money pile (tax revenues, including social security) ... but they'll almost certainly draw from it.

As for 'birthright citizenship' .. it's an issue but not the biggest one. Personally I think chain migration is a worse policy.

I know a family who has been here for 19 years, and they are just now naturalizing - despite having the right to do so for some time now.

Some citizens who have obtained residency and lived here for years have never become citizens because their home country does not accept dual citizenship (mainly China). So if an older person who has been here a long time wishes to become a citizen - even going so far as to give up their right to citizenship in their native land - I think that should be encouraged.

It's not like we are getting a lot of older people moving here legally anyway, because we have really restrictive immigration laws. So the ones that are here have likely been here for a while or are refugees - so I say make it easier for them.

 

[Hugopugo]

love it how trump is an immigrant himself and he dislikes this... we are living an era where people think its ok to exclude others or diminish them because of their race/beliefs/ideas... immigration is good, its what keeps the economy moving... but because people believe that immigration takes jobs, increases in crime, loss of nationality and identity people dismiss it.

Brazil is following in the steps of America, bringing a person that is in not qualified to run a country into power. with stupid idealist ideas. This is how Hitler and the nazi party gained popularity after the wwI... its sad to see this hapening.

I still believe that we need younger people in power... not millennials, but people close to that(80's)... im sick of old basterds telling me what they think is good for the country... we need younger people in power who understands the new generations...

the old basterds are dying, nobody cares what a 70 year old man thinks this world is heading too... they wont be alive for much longer

 

[kuwanger]

I raise the obvious question, but if Trump were to redefine birthright citizenship and it were applied retroactively*, would Trump be a US citizen? Would most US citizens? The fact is that before the 14th Amendment people understood that natural born citizenship** was a thing. That it extended to "all persons" meant slaves was precisely because of the racism that excluded blacks as persons. Then a later court case extended it to Asian-Americans who also had been historically deprived citizenship.

Really, the discussion that was brought up is true, that at the time of the 14th Amendment there wasn't an "illegal alien" problem. Why? Because heavily the US had an open border policy. But the racism took hold and the West Coast fought to keep out the Chinese and the East Coast tried to keep out the Catholics/Irish. It's little wonder there's a massive influx of racism now and how all the "changing demographic" will upset the purity of the United States--ie, utter hogwash given how impure the United States is and really deplorable how many people fight against the real melting pot the US is.

So, the real reason I asked the question at the start? Look again at the map. Why is the "New World" so birthright citizen happy? No doubt because to claim any other mechanism of citizenship as fundamentally supreme and the genocidal conquerors of the "New World" would have all their asses deported back to which they came by the native inhabitants. It'd outright undercut any claim they have to the land they took over.

Listen to the language. The assholes stole the United States and now see more "invaders" who are going to pull the same shit they did, and they want nothing of it. But they want to conveniently exclude only "those" people. If the blackness of what is in their heart were any more bare to the world, they'd all be shards of coal.

* Nominally, US courts don't consider their decisions which change the status/condition of things retroactive even if it has that effect but merely a realization of a correct interpretation/definition.

** In 1844 (ie before the 14th Amendment) there was already an acknowledgment of birthright citizenship.

 

[Joe88]

love it how trump is an immigrant himself and he dislikes this... we are living an era where people think its ok to exclude others or diminish them because of their race/beliefs/ideas... immigration is good, its what keeps the economy moving... but because people believe that immigration takes jobs, increases in crime, loss of nationality and identity people dismiss it.

Brazil is following in the steps of America, bringing a person that is in not qualified to run a country into power. with stupid idealist ideas. This is how Hitler and the nazi party gained popularity after the wwI... its sad to see this hapening.

I still believe that we need younger people in power... not millennials, but people close to that(80's)... im sick of old basterds telling me what they think is good for the country... we need younger people in power who understands the new generations...

the old basterds are dying, nobody cares what a 70 year old man thinks this world is heading too... they wont be alive for much longer

Trump was never an immigrant, he was born in NYC, his father was a US citizen and his mother immigrated LEGALLY and was a US citizen by the time he was born
He is going after illegal immigration

 

[chrisrlink]

may i say something what about LEGAL immagration? will it still apply to them or would you have to hold off on having a baby with you immagrant spouse for 4-6 years and you do realize this is political suicide he's basicly screwing himself and the GOP if he tries (don't mind it that orange turd needs to go)

 

[bitjacker]

Born in the U.S. is not the only condition of the statement. The other condition following the word "and" states that the human being in question is subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Both parts of the statement must be satisfied to continue reading. What is naturalization?

 

[Hugopugo]

Trump was never an immigrant, he was born in NYC, his father was a US citizen and his mother immigrated LEGALLY and was a US citizen by the time he was born
He is going after illegal immigration

yes, although you can claim that before america had an open boarder it still does not deny his part german or that his mother could have come in illegally just like some people claim that his wife did the same thing, and that he helped her get citizenship, how do you know? couse you read somewhere?...