What landmark cases will get turned back with the conservative trifecta?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
If Dems try to campaign on this issue, they will probably lose even more in 2028. Parents will always look out for their own children first and many will not support requiring this at the federal level. Public school enrollment for kids without legal status will become another state level policy decision. I also think that federal funding is likely to be eliminated for kids without legal status. |
Anonymous
We are. Because the impact on public health and safety would be more costly. You want to have an impervious border? Good luck. |
Anonymous
Clearly, there is no such thing. Even the law against perjury isn’t settled, I guess. Or the law against fraud, or stealing classified documents, or rape, or campaign, finance, violations, etc., etc. etc.. |
Anonymous
Non disabled children are entitled to an appropriate education too. And right now they aren't getting it thanks to all of the allowed behaviors in school due to IEPs. I'm 100% for special education for academic learning disabilites. I'm OVER the $hitty behavior being masked as "special needs" and I'm tired of parents being gaslit that they should be fine with this behavior in the classroom. |
Anonymous
This would be terrible for immigrants, and it would be terrible for non-immigrants, but Trump, at the guidance of Steven Miller, will do it, because they believe that people of color will stop coming to this country if people know their kids won't get educated. The cruelty is the point. Trump and Miller already illustrated this from 2016-2020 when they separated immigrant children from their parents (and lost a significant number of them). |
Anonymous
Why would this be terrible for immigrants? Prioritizing resources for those who came over legally could actually help them, as funds currently spent on illegal immigration could better serve legal immigrants’ needs. Many liberals don’t seem to understand that a large portion of Hispanics dislike illegal immigration, especially those living in border towns. In areas like Starr County, Texas—a border county with a 97% Hispanic population—Trump secured over 57% of the vote in the 2024 election, flipping a Democratic stronghold for the first time in 128 years. This shift isn’t isolated, as several other South Texas counties also demonstrated increased support for Trump. Nationally, his Hispanic support rose from about 28% in 2020 to as much as 37-40% in 2024, with Hispanic men showing a marked increase, as 54% voted for him in 2024, compared to 36% four years earlier. The only major pro-illegal immigration supporters seem to be white liberals, often out of touch and far removed from border communities, where they aren’t impacted by these issues in their schools or neighborhoods. |
Anonymous
Don't care. They'll leave when the gravy train ends. |
Anonymous
They'll leave. No plan required. |
Anonymous
|
Tbh, Trump will absolutely need to put together a good, seasonal guest worker program.
Republican small business owners in red state are about to get absolutely crushed by mass deportations. Republicans no longer have an excuse for not reforming the immigration system. I'm happy to let them own it and get the win if we can just put together something that's tough yet sane. Climate change is going to make human migration patterns even worse and more intense. |
Anonymous
| I am a Dem and fine with doing away with birthright citizenship. At least one of your parents should be a citizen for 6 months before the baby is born to get citizenship. Lots of other countries have requirements to be able claim citizenship. Birth tourism is a problem here. |
Anonymous
We will be living with a Trump appointed Supreme Court for the next 30+ years. Alito and Thomas will resign and trump will appoint equally (if not more so) crazy evil justices and they will be young. So we will have 5 of the SC appointed by trump for 30+ years. This is perhaps the biggest impact he will make on the country |
Anonymous
Thomas is going to retire. No way Alito and Thomas don't retire in the next 2 years. So Trump/Vance can appoint replacements. They have the senate, they have the WH, it's all they need |
Anonymous
correct, these isn't an issue, and you just deport the whole family together no need to separate the children. |
Anonymous
As a doctor you took an oath, to do no harm and to treat people medically as needed. You don't get to choose who or what to treat. Similarly, a pharmacist does not get to decide they won't prescribe BC or Plan B if it is legal in that state---similarly, if you are muslim you don't get a job in a pork processing facility and then claim you cannot work on the line with pork. It's part of the job, if you cannot perform the job, you don't get to have the job and pick and choose what you do |
Anonymous
That's not what Dobbs said. Dobbs held that there is no constitutional right to an abortion. That's literally the holding as it is described on the first page of the opinion. It had nothing to do with federal vs. state authority. As a practical matter, abortion has become a state-level issue, but that's not the holding in Dobbs. |