Reply to Why is there so much opposition to ending birthright citizenship?

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Why is there so much opposition to ending birthright citizenship?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]One of the major problems is the practice of "anchor babies".[/quote]

Usha Vance is an anchor baby. [/quote]

I’m the same kind of “anchor baby” as Usha Vance (born in the US to two Indian parents here on student visas), and also a Democrat who voted for Harris. I don’t think the legal basis for the EO is sound based on the language of the 14th Amendment, but I’m fine with the policy. Birthright citizenship is pretty dumb in this day and age.

My parents got their green cards when I was in elementary school and were naturalized when I was 12. I think it would have been perfectly reasonable for me to become a naturalized citizen, as their minor child, at the same time as them. That’s the type of policy change that would affect the children of legal immigrants and it’s the commonly used method for citizenship for the children of immigrants in most other first world countries. It’s not inhumane or really a bad policy at all. [/quote]

So you, Usha Vance, Kash Patel, Vivek Ramaswamy and hundreds of thousands of others born under the same circumstances are all ready to move to India because you're fine with Trump's policies to strip them of citizenship claims?[/quote]

NP- This EO is not retroactive so not sure why you are cooking up scenarios that won't happen.[/quote]

If SCOTUS agrees this is the right reading of the 14th amendment, then that interpretation will be retroactive.  Nothing in the text of the 14th has changed since 1868.[/quote]

The court wouldn’t need to make it retroactive.[/quote]

The Court wouldn't opine on whether it's retroactive or not. They'd opine on the legality of the EO. If it's legal, then a future President (or Trump himself) could issue a new EO that says it is retroactive.[/quote]
Which would then be challenged in court. Or the court could decide it’s not retroactive. There are multiple ways this could play out.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics