Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Trump reportedly plans to sign an executive order to terminate birthright citizenship [View all]bronxiteforever
(9,287 posts)82. Dotard Don doesn't know how to write a law
It takes too much work.
Plus this EO would be clearly unconstitutional since the Sup Ct in 1898 ruled in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). The 14th Amendment is also codified in federal statutory law at 8 U.S. Code § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth. So the birthright citizenship is found in the 14th Amendment, US Supreme Ct case law and for added measure federal statutory law.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
102 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Trump reportedly plans to sign an executive order to terminate birthright citizenship [View all]
nitpicker
Oct 2018
OP
I guess green carders, not being citizens, can't give birth to a U S citizen.
Honeycombe8
Oct 2018
#54
I immediately thought about the Russian women who come here to have babies
Maggiemayhem
Oct 2018
#35
Someone cited an 1898 case where a passport was revoked from a U.S. born Chinese individual
BumRushDaShow
Oct 2018
#78
Oh, my! Is he going to waiver the Russian women coming here to have their anchor babies?
allgood33
Oct 2018
#6
Um no they are going to throw out a clear violation of the 14th Amendment
BumRushDaShow
Oct 2018
#14
Congress had passed LAWS that restricted certain groups from immigration and citizenship
BumRushDaShow
Oct 2018
#83
" he could try to argue that its not a "law" thus he is not violating the 14th."
BumRushDaShow
Oct 2018
#80
No problem, now. We have a stacked S.Ct. w/two Trump loyalists. 1st time in history...
Honeycombe8
Oct 2018
#65
The current 5-4 SCOTUS really isn't any different from what it was before
BumRushDaShow
Oct 2018
#72
This is 100% the work of neo-fascist Stephen Miller, they know they cannot do this by E.O.
Tarc
Oct 2018
#17
Yes. His news cycle was taken away due to the slaughter or potential slaughter of U.S. citizens
BumRushDaShow
Oct 2018
#28
Yes it is specifically to get news cycles back before the election to gin up his deplorable base.
BumRushDaShow
Oct 2018
#41
This is to drum up votes. Just like sending the military to the Southern border.
WhoWoodaKnew
Oct 2018
#32
I think he talked about this during his campaign. So it's same ol', same ol'. nt
Honeycombe8
Oct 2018
#47
No, he did say this. It's being reported in the news, and I heard the video of him...
Honeycombe8
Oct 2018
#63
Where are the "strict constitutionalists" when we need them. Watching Jerry Springer.
walkingman
Oct 2018
#60
Whether true or not, I love the political timing of the release of this rumor. nt
MadDAsHell
Oct 2018
#67