Why is there so much opposition to ending birthright citizenship?

[Anonymous]

Careful what you wish for, OP. You could make the same argument about the 2nd amendment and "well regulated militias". Do I think that changes any time soon? Nope.

I think that's an OK trade.

I'll agree to no more birth right citizenship - say, one parent needs to be a citizen -- if we can repeal the right to bear arms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's the EO. It's long but this is the relevant portion. It applies to births starting 30 days from today.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-the-meaning-and-value-of-american-citizenship/

Among the categories of individuals born in the United States and not subject to the jurisdiction thereof, the privilege of United States citizenship does not automatically extend to persons born in the United States: (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States at the time of said person’s birth was lawful but temporary (such as, but not limited to, visiting the United States under the auspices of the Visa Waiver Program or visiting on a student, work, or tourist visa) and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.

Somebody should tell dementia don that he can’t change the constitution with a EO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, the United States finally joins the rest of the world in 2025 where citizenship requires at least one parent be a citizen. Way to go with common sense USA. Birthright citizenship as it was previously done was nutso.

Sorry, but this EO is unconstitutional.

If you don't like the Fourteenth Amendment, then propose an amendment to change it.

Scotus will uphold it

The mother and father's citizenship and status are not on the birth certificate.

This is going to create thousands, millions of stateless babies. When we need all the people we can get, as we approach population decline.

How can people be so stupid?

We have too many people now. Look at the difference in NOVA in last 40 years, it can not continue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, the United States finally joins the rest of the world in 2025 where citizenship requires at least one parent be a citizen. Way to go with common sense USA. Birthright citizenship as it was previously done was nutso.

Sorry, but this EO is unconstitutional.

If you don't like the Fourteenth Amendment, then propose an amendment to change it.

Scotus will uphold it

The mother and father's citizenship and status are not on the birth certificate.

This is going to create thousands, millions of stateless babies. When we need all the people we can get, as we approach population decline.

How can people be so stupid?

We have too many people now. Look at the difference in NOVA in last 40 years, it can not continue.

We’d all be fine if you left

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the EO. It's long but this is the relevant portion. It applies to births starting 30 days from today.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-the-meaning-and-value-of-american-citizenship/

Among the categories of individuals born in the United States and not subject to the jurisdiction thereof, the privilege of United States citizenship does not automatically extend to persons born in the United States: (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States at the time of said person’s birth was lawful but temporary (such as, but not limited to, visiting the United States under the auspices of the Visa Waiver Program or visiting on a student, work, or tourist visa) and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.

Somebody should tell dementia don that he can’t change the constitution with a EO

But the executive can decide how to defend be jurisdiction of the US. I assume parents will need social security numbers to get a child a SSN. I think SCOTUS will side with the admin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the EO. It's long but this is the relevant portion. It applies to births starting 30 days from today.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-the-meaning-and-value-of-american-citizenship/

Among the categories of individuals born in the United States and not subject to the jurisdiction thereof, the privilege of United States citizenship does not automatically extend to persons born in the United States: (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States at the time of said person’s birth was lawful but temporary (such as, but not limited to, visiting the United States under the auspices of the Visa Waiver Program or visiting on a student, work, or tourist visa) and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.

Somebody should tell dementia don that he can’t change the constitution with a EO

He is doing to score points with MAGA. Trump and his followers are all so stupid they don’t care.

[Anonymous]

We have good friends in the US on work visas. I think they have Green Cards, but I’m not sure. Their 14 year old and 7 year old haven’t ever lived anywhere else. The idea, in the future, that children born in those circumstances could be “sent back” seems complicated or disturbing to me. In cases where the children might not have family or know the language it seems pretty inhumane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the EO. It's long but this is the relevant portion. It applies to births starting 30 days from today.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-the-meaning-and-value-of-american-citizenship/

Among the categories of individuals born in the United States and not subject to the jurisdiction thereof, the privilege of United States citizenship does not automatically extend to persons born in the United States: (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States at the time of said person’s birth was lawful but temporary (such as, but not limited to, visiting the United States under the auspices of the Visa Waiver Program or visiting on a student, work, or tourist visa) and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.

Good. This is common sense and should have been implemented long ago.

Will you need a DNA paternity test to prove that the US father is really the father?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:European countries have histories of bloodlines, people who have lived in an area for a long time, have a shared culture, shared history, some shared DNA and have a similar look/features.

Countries in the western hemisphere were formed by immigration, by people moving to those countries. The United States does not have a long history of people who have lived in an area for a long time, with shared culture, shared history, shared DNA, similar look, etc. What we have is a shared culture that we all create, that is built upon chosen unity.

If we were to abolish birthright citizenship and switch to jus sanguinis, I assume that those of us who are currently citizens would be grandfathered in? Where would the cutoff be? People who have bloodlines as of 2024? Or were you thinking of something else?

Huh? You realize that people began settling here 400 years ago? That is a pretty long history.

And so you define the humans who were here millennia before that as…not people? Way to say the quiet part out loud.

DP. They weren't Americans, as in, citizens of the United States. Because there wasn't a United States yet.

250 years ago, there were 0 citizens then.

They didn't get citizenship until 100 years ago if they were living on a reservation.

And believe it or not, all it took to give them citizenship was an act of congress.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Citizenship_Act

All they did was say, native americans are subject to US jursidiction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Careful what you wish for, OP. You could make the same argument about the 2nd amendment and "well regulated militias". Do I think that changes any time soon? Nope.

I think that's an OK trade.

I'll agree to no more birth right citizenship - say, one parent needs to be a citizen -- if we can repeal the right to bear arms.

Oh we spotted the RINO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, the United States finally joins the rest of the world in 2025 where citizenship requires at least one parent be a citizen. Way to go with common sense USA. Birthright citizenship as it was previously done was nutso.

Sorry, but this EO is unconstitutional.

If you don't like the Fourteenth Amendment, then propose an amendment to change it.

Scotus will uphold it

The mother and father's citizenship and status are not on the birth certificate.

This is going to create thousands, millions of stateless babies. When we need all the people we can get, as we approach population decline.

But a birth certificate alludes to it because it lists the birth place of the father and mother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, the United States finally joins the rest of the world in 2025 where citizenship requires at least one parent be a citizen. Way to go with common sense USA. Birthright citizenship as it was previously done was nutso.

Sorry, but this EO is unconstitutional.

If you don't like the Fourteenth Amendment, then propose an amendment to change it.

Scotus will uphold it

The mother and father's citizenship and status are not on the birth certificate.

This is going to create thousands, millions of stateless babies. When we need all the people we can get, as we approach population decline.

But a birth certificate alludes to it because it lists the birth place of the father and mother.

Place of birth does not indicate citizenship status. You can get citizenship status at birth even if you are born outside the US if you are born to a US citizen parent who resides outside the US. Ted Cruz is an example, I believe.

My parents were not born in the US but are naturalized citizens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, the United States finally joins the rest of the world in 2025 where citizenship requires at least one parent be a citizen. Way to go with common sense USA. Birthright citizenship as it was previously done was nutso.

Sorry, but this EO is unconstitutional.

If you don't like the Fourteenth Amendment, then propose an amendment to change it.

Scotus will uphold it

The mother and father's citizenship and status are not on the birth certificate.

This is going to create thousands, millions of stateless babies. When we need all the people we can get, as we approach population decline.

But a birth certificate alludes to it because it lists the birth place of the father and mother.

It does not matter. I’m sure it will be enforced with application for - and issuance of - social security numbers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, the United States finally joins the rest of the world in 2025 where citizenship requires at least one parent be a citizen. Way to go with common sense USA. Birthright citizenship as it was previously done was nutso.

Sorry, but this EO is unconstitutional.

If you don't like the Fourteenth Amendment, then propose an amendment to change it.

Scotus will uphold it

The mother and father's citizenship and status are not on the birth certificate.

This is going to create thousands, millions of stateless babies. When we need all the people we can get, as we approach population decline.

But a birth certificate alludes to it because it lists the birth place of the father and mother.

Yeah, that doesn't work for so many of people who are born here.

DH and I came here legally as kids and became US citizens as teenagers. We were US citizens for a dozen plus years before our kids were born, but that doesn't change our birth place. There are lots and lots and lots of people born here with similar parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, the United States finally joins the rest of the world in 2025 where citizenship requires at least one parent be a citizen. Way to go with common sense USA. Birthright citizenship as it was previously done was nutso.

+1