Summary
The ACLU filed a federal lawsuit challenging President Trump’s executive order to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. if their parents are unlawfully present or have temporary legal status.
The order, set to take effect in 30 days, conflicts with the 14th Amendment, which guarantees birthright citizenship, upheld by the Supreme Court in 1898.
Critics argue the order creates a “subclass” of noncitizens, undermining fairness and equality.
The lawsuit seeks to block the order, which also directs agencies to stop issuing passports and recognizing affected children as citizens.
Here’s how Trump plans on ending birthright citizenship:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-the-meaning-and-value-of-american-citizenship/
14th Amendment: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
Trump’s argument:
If someone is not here legally, then the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” doesn’t apply to them. Their kids aren’t citizens.
I guess now he has to explain how he can deport people who aren’t “subject to the jurisdiction”.
This is contradictory of itself, because everyone inside the US is subject to it’s jurisdiction. If this argument is true, then non-citizens (even visitors) would not be subject to US laws writ large. You can’t pick and choose at your convenience. It’s a stupid argument.
Oh but he can and will. Who will stop him?
You can’t introduce contradictory laws and them de facto to effect.
He is also not personally going to be doing any of this, which means others will, and will be subject to the courts if they break the law. There are still federal judges and courts in this country, regardless of what SCROTUS seems to think.
Laws, schmaws.
Trump pardoned 1500+ violent insurrectionists yesterday.
Judge shop until you hit on another Aileen Cannon.
You can do whatever the fuck you want if you think you are in charge. Not saying there won’t be consequences but following laws hasn’t really been this dudes MO.
There won’t be consequences. There, I said it.
So did the Supreme Court. But that only applies for Republicans.
Well, except diplomats or foreign heads of state. That’s the point of the language. A queen can’t birth a prince here and he be eligible for the presidency down the road.
But unless they’re in their consulate, they’re on US soil, subject to the USEdit: was totally wrong
Nope. Even off of consulate grounds, diplomatic immunity holds. It wouldn’t be worth much if you were trapped in the embassy.
Sure, if they, e.g., murder someone and their home country waives diplomatic immunity, but otherwise they will just be sent home and possibly be charged there.
This is cool, I totally misunderstood what the immunity provided. Thanks for pointing it out. Read the wiki page on it after your comment.
You can if you have a pet Supreme Court.
Get ready for sov cits to find a way to apply this to themselves.
You don’t feel like 250 years is enough time to figure it out?
Yes, if they arent’ subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, you can’t touch them.
It’s obvious to anybody not deliberately misreading the text that this is meant to apply to people like foreign diplomats, who really are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. But then deliberately misreading the text is the specialty of the Roberts court, so who knows what they’d decide. Whatever some billionaires pays them to decide, I guess.
That might even be a tough sell to this SCOTUS. It’s going to be awfully hard to argue that people physically present in the United States aren’t subject to its laws.
You’re making the mistake of thinking they have to argue in good faith. Corporations are people and presidents are kings now, so all bets are off.
Not all presidents, just… One.
So if you’re here illegally you can just do literally anything you want… legally. A great argument to make.
“See? They’re all lawless criminals!”
Builds wall twice as tall