Discussion:
Judge Tells Trump Birthright XO Is Bullshit
Add Reply
Bradley K. Sherman
2025-01-23 18:36:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Appointed by Reagan:
|
| A federal judge on Thursday temporarily blocked President
| Trump's executive order to end automatic citizenship to
| babies born on American soil, dealing the president his
| first setback as he attempts to upend the nation's
| immigration laws and reverse decades of precedent.
|
| In a hearing held three days after Mr. Trump issued his
| executive order, a Federal District Court judge, John C.
| Coughenour, sided at least for the moment with four states
| that sued. "This is a blatantly unconstitutional order," he
| said.
| ...
<https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/23/us/politics/judge-blocks-birthright-citizenship.html>

--bks
Rudy Canoza
2025-01-23 18:54:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bradley K. Sherman
|
| A federal judge on Thursday temporarily blocked President
| Trump's executive order to end automatic citizenship to
| babies born on American soil, dealing the president his
| first setback as he attempts to upend the nation's
| immigration laws and reverse decades of precedent.
|
| In a hearing held three days after Mr. Trump issued his
| executive order, a Federal District Court judge, John C.
| Coughenour, sided at least for the moment with four states
| that sued. "This is a blatantly unconstitutional order," he
| said.
| ...
<https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/23/us/politics/judge-blocks-birthright-citizenship.html>
Automatic /jus soli/ birthright citizenship for anyone accidentally born in the
country is a bad policy that was *not* enacted by Congress, and it should be
ended. But Trump can't do it by executive order. The atrocious Wong Kim Ark
decision from 1898 needs to be overturned by SCOTUS.

In 2004, in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Justice Scalia referred to the terrorist, Yaser
Esam Hamdi, as a "a presumed American citizen." Hamdi was born in Louisiana to
Saudi parents who were here on a temporary work visa for the father. While still
an infant, Hamdi went home to Saudi Arabia and had nothing to do with the United
States until he bore arms against U.S. forces in Afghanistan in 2001.

Neither Roberts nor Alito were on the court yet, and obviously none of Trump's
appointees were. If Trump takes this case to SCOTUS, there is a solid chance
that Wong Kim Ark will be overturned.

The citizenship clause of the 14th amendment reads:

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.

"Subject to the jurisdiction" does not mean what open borders advocates like Lee
and Holman want it to mean. They want it to mean merely having to obey our laws.
It doesn't mean that alone. It means being subject to the *complete* legal and
political jurisdiction of the country, including owing the country allegiance.

Wong Kim Ark must go.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
2025-01-24 00:55:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Automatic /jus soli/ birthright citizenship for anyone accidentally born
in the country is a bad policy that was *not* enacted by Congress, and
it should be ended.
That’s the standard rule observed by most if not all countries, going back
centuries.

Otherwise you could end up with people being stateless.
Rudy Canoza
2025-01-24 03:54:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Post by Rudy Canoza
Automatic /jus soli/ birthright citizenship for anyone accidentally born
in the country is a bad policy that was *not* enacted by Congress, and
it should be ended.
That’s the standard rule observed by most if not all countries, going back
centuries.
That is completely false and always has been. Not a single European country has
automatic /jus soli/ birthright citizenship today — not one. Until the 1980s,
the UK did, and until 2005, Ireland did. Neither has it now. All other countries
*always* have followed the /jus sanguinis/ citizenship model: you're a citizen
at birth only if at least one of your parents is. In no European country does
birth in the country automatically confer citizenship.
Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Otherwise you could end up with people being stateless.
European countries following /jus sanguinis/ — that is, *all* European countries
— have provisions for dealing with people who otherwise would be born stateless.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
2025-01-24 06:56:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Post by Rudy Canoza
Automatic /jus soli/ birthright citizenship for anyone accidentally
born in the country is a bad policy that was *not* enacted by
Congress, and it should be ended.
That’s the standard rule observed by most if not all countries, going
back centuries.
That is completely false and always has been. Not a single European
country has automatic /jus soli/ birthright citizenship today — not one.
Look at all the blue parts here <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli>.
Rudy Canoza
2025-01-24 07:26:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Post by Rudy Canoza
Automatic /jus soli/ birthright citizenship for anyone accidentally
born in the country is a bad policy that was *not* enacted by
Congress, and it should be ended.
That’s the standard rule observed by most if not all countries, going
back centuries.
That is completely false and always has been. Not a single European
country has automatic /jus soli/ birthright citizenship today — not one.
Look at all the blue parts here <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli>.
Look at the fact that *none* of them are in Europe.

/jus soli/ is bad citizenship policy.
Siri Cruise
2025-01-24 01:52:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
   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.
"Subject to the jurisdiction" does not mean what open borders
advocates like Lee and
It meant diplomats whose diplomatic immunity puts them outside US
jurisdiction.

It also meant untaxed Indians. They were known to exist on land
the US claimed, but as long as the US could not prosecute nor
force obedience, they were outside US jurisdiction. Now since all
Indians in US territory are under US jurisdiction, they are also
native citizens at birth.

The only remaining excluded class are children of diplomats.
--
Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 3.2 / \
of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed
J Carlson
2025-01-24 04:11:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
    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.
"Subject to the jurisdiction" does not mean what open borders advocates like
Lee and
It meant diplomats whose diplomatic immunity puts them outside US jurisdiction.
No, that is *not* all it meant. It meant owing allegiance to the country. A
child born in the U.S. to aliens who do not owe allegiance to the country *also*
does not owe allegiance, and thus is not subject to the full and complete
jurisdiction of the U.S.

The citizenship clause of the 14th amendment closely tracked, and is based on,
the citizenship clause of the 1866 civil rights act. That clause reads:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States
of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United States
and *not subject to any foreign power*, excluding Indians not taxed, are
hereby declared to be citizens of the United States.

https://loveman.sdsu.edu/docs/1866FirstCivilRightsAct.pdf

The drafters of the 14th amendment fucked that up. "not subject to any foreign
power" is unambiguous: all aliens in the U.S. *are* subject to a foreign power,
and thus so are their U.S.-born offspring. "Subject to the jurisdiction thereof"
is ambiguous — just what degree of jurisdiction is meant? The debate in the
Senate in 1866 made clear that "jurisdiction" meant the *complete* political
jurisdiction, not merely legal jurisdiction. Of course a tourist in the U.S. is
subject to our laws — he'll be prosecuted if he holds up a liquor store and is
caught — but the country holds no *political* jurisdiction. The tourist cannot
be drafted nor forced to perform jury duty.
It also meant untaxed Indians. They were known to exist on land the US claimed,
but as long as the US could not prosecute nor force obedience, they were outside
US jurisdiction. Now since all Indians in US territory are under US
jurisdiction, they are also native citizens at birth.
*Not* based on the 14th amendment. Native Americans are now citizens at birth
only by act of Congress. It's by the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. Look it up,
stupid.
NoBody
2025-01-23 20:52:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bradley K. Sherman
|
| A federal judge on Thursday temporarily blocked President
| Trump's executive order to end automatic citizenship to
| babies born on American soil, dealing the president his
| first setback as he attempts to upend the nation's
| immigration laws and reverse decades of precedent.
|
| In a hearing held three days after Mr. Trump issued his
| executive order, a Federal District Court judge, John C.
| Coughenour, sided at least for the moment with four states
| that sued. "This is a blatantly unconstitutional order," he
| said.
| ...
<https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/23/us/politics/judge-blocks-birthright-citizenship.html>
Coughenour is a Communist DEI appointment, as were all of Reagan's appointments.
Siri Cruise
2025-01-24 01:54:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by NoBody
  |
  | A federal judge on Thursday temporarily blocked President
  | Trump's executive order to end automatic citizenship to
  | babies born on American soil, dealing the president his
  | first setback as he attempts to upend the nation's
  | immigration laws and reverse decades of precedent.
  |
  | In a hearing held three days after Mr. Trump issued his
  | executive order, a Federal District Court judge, John C.
  | Coughenour, sided at least for the moment with four states
  | that sued. "This is a blatantly unconstitutional order," he
  | said.
  | ...
<https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/23/us/politics/judge-blocks-birthright-citizenship.html>
Coughenour is a Communist DEI appointment, as were all of Reagan's appointments.
The whole fucking world is against us. ~~ Silent Bob
--
Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 3.2 / \
of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed
186282@ud0s4.net
2025-01-24 05:57:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
It is bullshit, even Trump knows it - but he PROMISED
to give it a try.
Mitchell Holman
2025-01-24 13:59:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@ud0s4.net
It is bullshit, even Trump knows it - but he PROMISED
to give it a try.
In all things Trump needs a scapegoat.

"The liberal judge blocked me"

"The deep state blocked me"

"The labor unions blocked me"

"The other countries blocked me"

"The Congress block me"

Loading...