Donald Trump Tries To Kill Birthright Citizenship With Executive Order
www.huffpost.com
"We think we have really good grounds," the president said of the order that is certain to prompt immediate legal challenges.

Summary

Donald Trump signed an executive order to challenge birthright citizenship, targeting children of undocumented immigrants born in the U.S.

The order argues against the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship for those born on U.S. soil.

It bars federal agencies from recognizing birthright citizenship and imposes a 30-day waiting period for enforcement.

The order is expected to face significant legal challenges, with critics calling it unconstitutional.

  • CethinEnglish
    121·
    16 hours ago

    It doesn’t say solely. If they meant solely they would have written that. It’s very obvious it means if you have to obey the laws then you count. Diplomats with immunity don’t count.

    Edit: As further evidence, you’re subject to state laws as well, not just the United States laws.

      • CethinEnglish
        4·
        11 hours ago

        I said in the comment above, it’s to not include people who are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Diplomats with immunity, for example. It’s reasonable obvious. You really have to try to stretch things to make it apply to immigrants who are subject to the jurisdiction of the US.

        • credo@lemmy.world
          4·
          10 hours ago

          Yes, that was the opinion of the Supreme Court in 1898. This is a different SC and, as we’ve already seen, are perfectly willing to overturn precedent. From the dissent:

          In other words, the Fourteenth Amendment does not exclude from citizenship by birth children born in the United States of parents permanently located therein, and who might themselves become citizens; nor, on the other hand, does it arbitrarily make citizens of children born in the United States of parents who, according to the will of their native gov.

          My point is… you don’t actually know why they wrote that clause because it’s not entirely clear and, thus, subject to further debate at this new court.