End of Birthright Citizenship? (ft. Liz Dye)

[@LegalEagle]

Do you think he'll succeed in ending this 150+ year legal precedent? Compare news coverage from diverse sources around the world on a transparent platform driven by data. Try Ground News today and get 40% off your subscription: ground.news/legaleagle ⚖⚖⚖ Do you need a great lawyer? I can help! legaleagle.link/eagleteam

[@Mesarim]

He better not!

[@poenpotzu2865]

At this point it would not surprise me. A fair chunk of american view him as some divine prophet, and if republicans see if this both appeals/makes money they sure will.

[@jdudbdjxb7687]

Doubt, how would they handle legal immigrants giving birth to a child in the states? Would they need to get permission from their "home" country? How would that work over generations? How would they deal with children who both aren't American but also aren't claimed by their "home" country? It's just less complicated and less headaches to say that everyone born on US soil is American. And I don't mean just conceptually, because I'd imagine that there would be many case by case basis's that would cost a ton of money to take to court. I understand that encouraging people to illegally immigrate isn't a good idea, but this isn't one of the ways to do that. Just work on the border or give the people a reason to stay in their country.

[@jaydee1389]

Don't worry LegalEagle, if I get deported you can visit me in DR. I got you fam!!! First they end the birth right and then they take away my birth certificate.

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

It's difficult to amend the Constitution, even for a full house. But if so? Then... All Europeans can return to the Queen.

[@EBDMG]

Remember folks, when someone says “The Government would never do that” oh they would. And they have.

[@RootedHat]

"I am the Senate" vibes

[@TheRealBatCave]

Have done what

[@AdanSolas]

And they *should*

[@someguy1ification]

Seems like an accurate representation of what the voters want. Keep electing these clowns, get a circus.

[@TheRealBatCave]

@someguy1ification I'm confused, when he sais they have, what have they done

[@drmajalis1583]

That joke in Futurama where the head of Nixon says "Oh yeah? Well I know a place where the constitution means squat!" and then it cuts to the Supreme Court continues to age uncomfortably well

[@vonn4017]

unfortunately for you , you do not know what a judges job is. the police enforce the law judges interpret the law

[@Jack-sq6xb]

@@vonn4017if i interpret someone saying “no” as “yes” im interpreting it but im interpreting it wrong

[@nickg131]

​@@Jack-sq6xb Exactly. "Interpret" doesn't give a judge free rule to claim that a law means whatever they want. "My interpretation of the first amendment is that it's illegal to eat bananas!"

[@Charon85Onozuka]

@@vonn4017 Considering bribery is legal; a judge's job is to deliver the legal rulings their backers want.

[@drmajalis1583]

@@vonn4017 and the judges are not Gods, they're people, and very corrupt people who have consistently been ignoring stare decisis

[@TransitTechLA]

So let me get this straight. The 2nd Amendment is an "enshrined constitutional right" but the 14th Amendment is "woke policy that needs to be abolished"

[@cmdraftbrn]

no. The 2nd Amendment is an "enshrined constitutional right" when politically expedient. the 14th Amendment is "woke policy that needs to be abolished" because its politically expedient.

[@dr.floridamanphd]

Right. Anything they don’t like about the Constitution is merely an inconvenience that can be ignored but you better not “grab my guns!!!!” because it’s their constitutional right to have any weapon they want without restriction or limitation.

[@TonyJames.]

The hypocrisy

[@lobserve1]

Bingo

[@nuclearpotential6323]

These leftwing takes never cease to amaze me, where did this idea of abolishing the 14th amendment come from? It's like no one watched the video, the argument is about misinterpretation of birth right citizenship. This is what peak conformation bias.

[@DarKlowd1]

As a person of color who has been pulled over multiple times for my skin color, one cop going as far as to start detaining me and asking for my green card (i was born in the US to legal US citizens), I am terrified that this is setting up precedence that people like me will be denaturalized and deported to some random place they think I'm from.

[@thieupham493]

Don't feel bad, I'm hoping to use this law to remove President Musk and his puppet to a country that wants them like Russia.

[@milkflavored]

I wish they’d clarify what technicalities this is based on bc this has been happening for decades, but now it seems like its solely race and not paperwork, or some fun combo of the two where they deport first and ask questions never My friend’s dad was arrested twice by 🧊 under the bush admin as a green card holder, and they’re white, so …

[@ogadlogadl490]

That’s exactly where this is heading, happened as recently as the 50’s, US born citizens getting shipped to Mexico even tho most had never even stepped foot in Mexico in their entire life.

[@fasteddie7276]

Lol. You never got pulled over because of your skin color. 😂

[@plektosgaming]

This is normal in the rest of the world, though. Many countries also require you to have your ID on you at all times while in public. If you WERE in the U.K. or Japan illegally, or overstayed your visa, you'd be tracked down within days and kicked out. So, yes, they can and do ask and yes, they enforce their immigration policies with zero leeway or consideration given. So does the E.U., and even Mexico. We are the one exception in the entire world (that has a functioning police/government) where people who are here illegally are not immediately deported.

[@scytaleghola5969]

Donald Trump's grandfather and grandmother were not US citizens, Therefore, Donald Trump's father was not a US citizen (if there is no birthright citizenship). Donald Trump's mother came form Scotland and she was only granted citizenship on the (incorrect) assumption that Fred Trump was an American citizen. Therefore, neither of Donald Trump's parents were US citizens, so Donal Trump is not a US citizen. Melania is an illegal immigrant. She entered the US as a visitor, but then did a lot of modeling work without a work visa. That violation made her ineligible for naturalization. Baron would not be a US citizen. Turtles all the way down...

[@osiel25]

It doesnt affect white people

[@alan62036]

Rules for thee not for me

[@justinoxton6790]

​@@Snake369just using trumps logic

[@Callimo]

​@@Snake369 Yeah, under the federalist interpretation of the 14th Amendment, not even Trump could claim American citizenship. So, y'know, careful what you wish for and all that.

[@justinoxton6790]

@Snake369 yes, you are right. I'm not, as I did not write it.. glad we could come to a even agreement on that.

[@3113mac]

The people who support removing the 14th amendment from the constituion tend to overlap with people who argue that you can't remove the 2nd amendment because it's part of the constitution. Gotta love the double standards.

[@nanotech1921]

Its classic “rights for me but not for thee” the same crayzo 2nd amendment people have also tried to say people who don’t align with them shouldn’t have the right to bear arms ironically

[@ErikDayne]

I think we know by now that things like “legality” and “tradition” aren’t really what they care about. This is more about benefitting people that look like them and pray to the same God at the expense of everyone else.

[@planescaped]

Keep 'em both I say.

[@darkstarr984]

The only amendment that has ever been removed so far was prohibition because it was causing too much trouble to apply. We’re going to lose the 14th first and probably the 1st second

[@dumflame]

@@planescapedwhat about removing both?🤔 Actually that’s kinda dum

[@john2432]

“Hey at this point who cares about the Constitution anyways?” -The Supreme Court, Defenders of the Constitution

[@AdanSolas]

As it should be. It's full of a bunch of outdated nonsense that doesn't apply in today's world. The idea that such a framework should be followed when people back then couldn't even convince of the concept of a smartphone is laughable.

[@ErikDayne]

Yeah you’re not kidding. They literally just manufactured some nonsense about “presidential immunity” out of thin air. There’s not a single word about that in the Constitution but they just decided they wanted it to exist anyway, so now it does.

[@ErikDayne]

@@AdanSolasthere’s a process to change the Constitution and it doesn’t include the Supreme Court just ignoring it

[@shadowldrago]

@@ErikDayne Which means nothing whatsoever if they just do it anyway.

[@erikburzinski8248]

They don't defend it or we would still have tiktok and I don't even use tiktok but I think that was a major 1st amendment violation

[@PhoenixMcGinnis]

This is why you don't elect people to office that can't pass a 5th grade test on history.

[@mof5490]

That’s what legal experts are for😂

[@Nightriser271828]

A politician being able to pass a 5th grade history test has no bearing on their constituent's ability to do so, and their constituents are the ones they have to appeal to. The issue is not just knowledge, but malice.

[@gohawks3571]

But it seems like the majority that apply are this group of people 😭😭😭 Because intelligent people don't wanna deal with this mess😔😒

[@thieupham493]

Elon and Trump do not need to pass the test, they can afford to pay someone to take the test for them. I agree with President Musk that we should get rid of birthright citizenship so we can deport the Trump to Russia where they are beloved.

[@NostraSamus]

This is why you don't elect people to office that simply can't pass the 5th grade.

[@Sigma00000]

Breaking News: Us supreme Court declares the Constitution unconstitutional

[@daniel-panek]

Is this The Onion? Oh no, it's reality. Hard to tell sometimes...

[@joanfregapane8683]

Just the Bill of Rights.

[@daniel-panek]

@@joanfregapane8683 there are many conservatives that actually believe that the bill of rights are the only "real" amendments and even some don't like all of them...

[@BackStabbinJew]

Breaking News: US Border just an imaginary line that means nothing.

[@Skankhunt668]

​@@BackStabbinJewno it does mean something

[@coolnerdlll6053]

Elon was born in South Africa. The mental gymnastics required for the mindset of these people is absolutely mind-boggling.

[@coreylemon]

Ironically, this makes him a valid citizen since he qualified for citizenship through other routes.

[@esaty14]

he has legal documents. The loop is fairly obvious, and not quite a loop at all...

[@bluelotus3750]

Let's not forget, Drump's mother was an immigrant. 2 of his wives were/are immigrants, so 4 of his kids would, technically, also be affected by his "rules". This is equivalent to the German moustached man, whose mother was Jewish and who did not look Aryan in anyway. Yet, he somehow lead that whole "movement". The hypocrisy is gross.

[@Oscar_the_fascist_slayer]

He's rich so they don't think rules should apply to him

[@AdanSolas]

@@izicial7469 Well, you can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs.

[@tonymouannes]

They're mixing up illegal immigrants and legal non-permanent residents. Politicians like to say things that sound smart, not things that are actually smart.

[@ticklord]

It's not an accident. They're wholly racist remember?

[@irtwiaos]

Well the eo came out and it have a clause specifically about legal non permanent resident.

[@zucchinigreen]

"Invaders" being the primary dog whistle. I wish more legal US citizens knew how hard it is to actually get citizenship.

[@JanelleChristmas-w6u]

No, what you don't understand is there is no such thing as a legal non-permanent residents, in their opinion.

[@tonymouannes]

@@JanelleChristmas-w6u that's pretty much what I'm saying

[@simonkormendy849]

I was legitimately born on Australian soil, in Western Australia, that makes me a bona fide Australian citizen, what I would like to ask Mr Trump is this "By what right have you to determine whether a person is a US citizen or not, when your mum was originally from Scotland, and your dad was originally a refugee from Germany? who made you God to say you can take away someone's US citizenship? no one." technically, the only way Mr Trump can change the US Constitution is if the US congress has a two-thirds majority vote.

[@mito88]

trump is a cheap demagogue

[@gphanisrinivasful]

Not just that, 75% of the states must also ratify.

[@divermike8943]

2/3 vote by BOTH the house and the Senate AND 3/4 ratification by the states legislators.

[@jmoliere1207]

becuse the y arnt us citezenship

[@joelhahn2501]

Congress has previously ignored the 14th Amendment to remove citizenship from law-abiding, natural-born citizens, so unfortunately, thete is ample precedent. Specifically, in the Expatriation Act of 1907, which declared that women who married non-citizen men, even those who were permanent residents, automatically lost their citizenship. And when that part of the law was rewritten in 1934, it wasn't made retroactive, so affected women--who may have never left the U.S. their whole lives--had to _apply to get their citizenship back_ My great-grandmother was one of those affected by this law, so this hits close to home.

[@ford-wp1yq]

The f###? Crazy smh

[@ginasartadventures2716]

Same here.

[@byron.jennings]

That's why my grandfather was born as a "Jennings" instead of a "Hernandez". His parents had to separate, or he wouldn't have been an American citizen.

[@lg-ii6pm]

It looks like the caselaw for that revolved around the theory that marriage was a voluntary act. So the court avoided the 14th amendment because supposedly the women effectively consented to losing citizenship.

[@UnicornsPoopRainbows]

That is insane and how was that skipped in my multiple US history classes K-12? I know there is a lot to teach but damn, wouldn't that have required at least a paragraph? How tf did I stumble across forced sterilization and not this? (which sadly, was news to my high school teachers as well)

[@Insertusernamehere2248]

Man they really told that man “we kidnapped your ancestors so you’re not a citizen here” as if he had anything to do with THEIR crime against HIS family wtf

[@NoriMori1992]

Who are you talking about?

[@Orthus100]

@@NoriMori1992 Dredd Scott

[@KohniHart]

whom built a technologically advanced society?

[@therexyogaming]

​@KohniHart Calling 18th century America "advanced" is a bit of a stretch, Britain was still more advanced than us at the time. We really kicked things off in the 19th century, and became fully dominant only after WW1.

[@MumblyJumbles]

Welcome to North Korea.

[@ltfguitar]

So this amendment can be removed, but "right to bear arms shall not be infringed"??

[@kingfait5437]

what about free speech and the right to bear Arms😂

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

@@kingfait5437 Funny... Given the stone above the sun with a name on it.

[@JohnDoe-qz1ql]

Everything in the Constitution can be amended, even ignored. It’s just hard to amend.

[@s7robin105]

I don't know about you but with the way things are going I think people should take every option to defend themselves and their families.

[@joyifu]

It’s always been more than just banning guns. We shouldn’t let our politicians revoke whatever rights we have left just because they can.

[@Maxolotl124]

Imagine being a 15 year old child of an illegal immigrant who's spent their entire life in the US, and then getting deported to a place you've never lived before, that you have no concept of ghe culture of, and that you might not even speak the language of. This is going to be someone's reality soon enough.

[@viefcheesecake]

Or their parents get deported and the kid gets left alone?

[@markgutierez9922]

​@@viefcheesecake we have to keep the families together 😂. There is only one way. I don't believe that children should suffer for the sins of their parents, but it's impossible to seek justice without cutting through an innocent. I agree with removing the incentive for people to enter illegally. I disagree with retroactively applying this law.

[@s0515033]

​@viefcheesecake that doesn't work and is wildly unethical. 😂

[@ragerancher]

"We had a war in which the Confederacy lost" Yeah, it seems they keep forgetting that bit.

[@garethaethwy]

They lost in the short term, but seem to be winning at the moment...

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

​@@garethaethwyShouldn't have pardoned those traitors.

[@truth7348]

I think they need a reminder. A stronger one

[@mreaper2468]

The confederates were liberals. The "big switch" is a lie

[@dr_diddy]

@@neurofiedyamato8763 yh the biggest screw up America ever did was letting the traitors live. US has been divided ever since, I wonder what would have happened if Lincoln lived. Texas still threatens to damn cede every couple years for god sake 😭

[@MS-jp3op]

This won't end here. Many in conservative movements have also expressed the opinion that only landowners should be allowed to vote. They are literally trying to return to feudalism. There will be the oligarchs and the serfs.

[@wormer104]

And then the pitchforks come out.

[@coolnerdlll6053]

Guys, I'm starting to think they might only care about rich people.

[@XBluDiamondX]

Yeah, I've been seeing that sentiment in various social media circles by some conservatives. It's hilarious to think these people believe their vote should be worth more just because they live in bumfuck nowhere with some plot a land opposed to somebody living in an apartment in some random city.

[@phillipA123]

​@@wormer104 Pitchforks vs knights in armor and horses was bad enough....now it's Apache helicopters and abrams tanks...this has all been intentional.

[@darkstarr984]

I’m glad my brother who owns a house and my other brother’s friend who owns his house are fully for women’s education and access to reproductive healthcare. For really stupid reasons, IMO, but they are.

[@smartmouth4444]

The answer to "can they do this?" is yes. Not because it's legally sound or morally correct. Because democracy is dead and the oligarchs can do whatever they want.

[@deliquescencemusic]

Democracy is dead is such a defeatist attitude. Bastardised, yes, absolutely. But its fixable, theres still more of us (when everyone stops being apathetic). It cant be fixed without everyone either.

[@Aniaas1]

@@deliquescencemusic "It cant be fixed without everyone either" - That is exactly why it's dead

[@britishrocklovingyank3491]

@@deliquescencemusic Yes, but the majority clearly voted to get rid of democracy. We had a whole election about it. People who want democracy are doing nothing to bring it back. Actions matter more than feelings.

[@BTrain-is8ch]

Morality has little to do with governance. People need to stop living in fantasy land and realize if the government can give you something it can take it away too. The only defense is a small government with tightly defined responsibilities.

[@joshuaroefs9279]

As a citizen of the democraty of the state of new york who does not live within the confines of one of the 5 cities required to win the election, good riddance. Democray is a dictatorship pretending to be free and fair. Long live the Republic.

[@spicytuna62]

I love how their favorite laws are completely unambiguous. Like how they go around wearing hats that say "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" but when it comes to the ones they _don't_ like, then it's all no no no, it's open to interpretation.

[@petersage5157]

Back in the Dubya era, there was a widely circulated political cartoon where an Angry White Man was shaking a finger at a Hispanic family shouting "It's time to reclaim America from illegal immigrants!" A Native American behind him said "I'll help *you* pack." The people who were actually here first weren't granted citizenship until 1924. EDIT: I can't believe this comment is trouncing Devin's pinned comment in ratios.

[@RichardDemattis]

I never understood this argument because doesn’t this actually prove the point of Americans who support strict immigration ? You’re saying that the fear of illegal immigrants coming in and displacing you and your culture is rationally based on history…

[@RichardDemattis]

I never understood this argument because doesn’t this actually prove the point of Americans who support strict immigration ? You’re saying that the fear of illegal immigrants coming in and displacing you and your culture is rationally based on history…

[@quacknaround]

Mostly forgotten peoples. But they were considered citizens of their own nation. Native Nations were the first nations the United States made treaties with. We showed these treaties as evidence of our independence to England. But after repeatedly breaking our treaties and brutally killing them and removing them it's evident they were only used for the benefit of United States colonization.

[@jakeaurod]

That makes a certain kind of sense. If native groups wanted to view themselves as independent nations, then accepting citizenship from their occupier might be seen as tacit approval. But I'm not sure what they actually thought about it at the time.

[@drachma7434]

It's not an argument it's just showing hypocrisy. Modern immigrants are coming for similar reasons as most of the early Americans did and unlike back them aren't doing so with the support of a major power who wants to destroy and replace the existing countries. The main point is to not hate immigrants when you and your family are immigrants

[@CesarDaSalad]

So the pledge he made on Inauguration Day to defend the Constitution is actually gonna be a "eh, maybe if I feel like it, or not" kind of pledge.

[@I_AM_BAYTOR]

So he's a normal politician after all.

[@330DKNY]

It always was for Dump

[@nathanmead9585]

Well, he already said ages ago that the "oath of office" isn't something he believes in, cares about, or is bound by. The fact that we're still going along with the whole song and dance is grotesque.

[@SuprousOxide]

Remember, he argued he had NOT sworn an oath to support the constitution, when that oath was inconvenient for him

[@weschilton]

@@I_AM_BAYTOR Faaaaarrrrr from it.

[@aldotorres1983]

I was born in Chicago in 1983 to Mexican parents. I'm a Marine Corps veteran and I've been a law abiding citizen all my life. In short, I've considered myself an American and nothing else. If feels deeply offensive someone like trump, a patriot in name only (PINO?), would say someone like me is not worthy enough to be an American citizen.

[@ChrisKellyPrime]

Yeah that's absolutely disgusting and you're far more American than Trump will ever be. 🫡🇺🇸

[@DullyDust]

I'm adopting the PINO abbreviation into my lingo now, thanks ^^

[@hirahiro2331]

There are a majority giving birth in the country to stay in the country. If there weren’t an influx, I think it’d be okay.

[@idontwantahandlethough]

yeah man. It's frickin ridiculous. Some of the most patriotic people I know were born here to parents of other countries

[@shkotayd9749]

They are coming specifically for you and your parents. Thank the majority of stupid voters in this country and may you be safe.

[@BadGVideoGames]

I like how he said "We're the only country doing birthright citizenship," when he signed it. Because we are besides those 32 other countries that do it. I've been waiting a decade for him to say something that's actually right.... still waiting apparently. 😎

[@JBharvey1984]

Which countries?

[@baintreachas]

@@JBharvey1984pretty much the Americas

[@juancorrea2313]

@@JBharvey1984Mexico and most of South America

[@desmondchew9789]

Most of the world actually. Just look up countries that practice jus soli, where you get citizenship if you get born through proper procedures and with a birth certificate. Immigrants are still capable of getting one but like Liz said in the vid, while it is in the countries' right to punish the offenders, the children are a victim of circumstance and should be granted the citizenship

[@Valiente350]

Only 27.4% of countries in the world have laws regarding birthright citizenship if you go with the maximum count of 237 official countries. The large majority of the unrestricted countries (33) are in the Americas likely due to colonialism, and another 32 have restrictions on citizenship dependent on the status of the parents. Japan has a stipulation for those who do not have any type of citizenship. I wonder what drove that 🤔

[@sourceeee]

i've been 27 years alive in the US as a law abiding citizen with birthright citizenship from Canadian-born parents. i find it insane that through no effort of my own i can be come a criminal with grounds for deportation

[@YouAreSoMadRN]

Nothing is being said about previous cases. It’s all about future cases.

[@garrett8707]

But in practice they might not go after you. They tend to only go after those from the below southern border

[@HPLovecats]

​@YouAreSoMadRN lmao. thats cute you think that

[@jaydee1389]

@@garrett8707 looks around the room in Spanish. My parents are both Dominican, they came here illegally and got to stay cuz I was born here. So yea, I think I'm gonna audition for 90Day Fiance, gotta find an American to marry first.

[@NotEmiliaNatsuki]

I find it crazy that right now you can have lived here since you were a baby and not be a citizen if you were born elsewhere. There are people that have lived here longer than me who are not citizens because of the hospital they were born in lol.

[@HPLovecats]

I'm sure this will bring down the price of eggs

[@XBluDiamondX]

Yeah. The farmers can lift themselves up by their own bootstraps and do all the farming themselves. Who needs migrants?

[@SnuubScadoob]

@XBluDiamondX What’s sad is that migrants being mistreated and paid peanuts if what keeps the price of eggs and other groceries down. The system has long been broken, the problem was no one cared. But hey! You’re not wrong! Let’s see if all the “they’re taking our jobs” homies flock to the fields to take those positions that are about to suddenly become open!

[@virginiatyree6705]

I guess irony is not dead. I want CHEAP eggs. Forget the constitution. v

[@shrewmcmoist7515]

@Gentleman.J.Daniels lol thats funny

[@SnuubScadoob]

I love how KZbin now censors even the most harmless of comments. Even a comment mentioning how the price of eggs and groceries was as low as they were due to migrants being mistreated and paid peanuts for years.

[@simontechdev]

"You'd think that a 130 years a precedence, would give us confidence about the outcome at the supreme court - but with these guys you never know"

[@leesweeney8879]

Same court that used 1600 law to saw what they do is legal, that court?

[@markjohansen6048]

And the second amendment is a precedent of over 200 years. Why is it ok to question the second but not the 14th?

[@mondenkindqueen]

Does the 14th exist only to kill people? Don’t lie, cry or deny it, a guns only purpose is to kill. Why do you think you have an unlimited right to kill people, with no checks or responsibilities?

[@sdk0524]

Pushback @11:07, as someone who would be classified as African American/Black, parents and grandparents as Colored or American Negro, WE ARE NOT IMMIGRANTS. The African ancestors I have were forced here, the Indigenous side were re-classified as Negro. I AM NOT AN IMMIGRANT

[@leullakew9579]

Jus Soli Birthright Citizenship is nationality law (not immigration), existed as establ. common law pre-indep. Only thing 14th Amend. did was extend it to Black ppl then o/POCs instead of Whites only.

[@tackytaco8133]

I dont get why would give this pushback. I mean do you want to be forced out again or what ?

[@joshuapalmer69]

If someone was born here, they likely don’t have citizenship anywhere else. That would mean these people also have no country to legally send them. The legal and diplomatic hurdles would be extraordinary. Then the amount to fund this operations working through all this and housing the people would be huge. This would create more problems for almost no real societal contribution

[@jasond.b-w]

This is the situation I’m in right now, for a different reason. Born covertly and never had a birth certificate or any record of my existence for the first half of my life. I’ve been on my own since I was an early teen and that’s when I started seeking proof that I was born here. I know that I must have been, but I have no one to attest to my birth, personally or legally. It’s been over a decade and I’m still not a ‘citizen’ - which also means I can’t get any form of ID or anything that requires it - but there’s nowhere for me to be deported to. I’m not a citizen of anywhere and wouldn’t be allowed into anywhere without documentation of _some_ sort from _somewhere._ It’s a nightmare and this isn’t what our country needs.

[@cardescomedioses3674]

​@jasond.b-w i'm sorry for you bro, usa legal system is truely a bureucratic hell as soon as you don't grasp it the right side, hope the best for you

[@takatamiyagawa5688]

They are likely citizens of the country their parents are citizens of, AKA jus sanguinis.

[@mars3168]

@@jasond.b-w I really hope you can find some help navigating your situation. I wish you the best of luck!

[@summe6221]

​@@takatamiyagawa5688 but if youre born in a country that makes you a citizen of that country. Not the one your parents were born in. The other country isn't just gonna give them citizenship cause thier parents were born there.

[@tempestgcc]

"In the beginning there was racism" is an underrated line

[@wambacwm]

Luckily that's all behind us now /s

[@AdanSolas]

@@wambacwm Exactly. These people out here are screaming about things long past.

[@docdirtymrclean3610]

Im pretty sure it is still there. In fact i believe it is the Reichwings main source of energy.

[@Gentleman.J.Daniels]

well... in the begining africa was enslaving itself for others to use them from other tribes...cmmon now

[@Jesse-in3pd]

The vast majority if not outright all of countries in europe, africa, and asia do not have birthright citizenship, it is only common in north and south america due to colonization population requirements due to historically "unsettled" lands. This is the default state in almost all of the world, where the only citizen generation is through children of citizens being born, and immigrants going through the naturalization process. This is not opression, this is the standard position nearly every worldwide government has.

[@Kungfukenny369]

So ironic trump says “we’ll have education back”. Didn’t he say he was getting rid of the department of education? How do you fix something by getting rid of it?

[@JoeMun]

You get rid of it and remake it in your own image 😊

[@firesong7825]

@@Gbleesko Yeah, and it was shit.

[@thechemise4487]

​@@Gbleeskoyou do get in some states they try to include young earth teaching which is not education at all. That can happpen only if the department of education is abolished. Not like america got a good education level compared to other countries.

[@EdOuellette]

There's nothing ironic about it... your post is like saying, "You're getting rid of God by closing a church." Governmental agencies don't bring education... they help shape it, but by getting rid of a department it doesn't follow that education will go away.

[@deedrole5296]

@@Gbleesko If that were true we wouldn't have a Department of Education, because that was created to address problems of not having equity and cohesion within the country in regards to fair access to education and educational opportunities.

[@AureusWeaver]

Update: He did it, he signed the executive order that ends birthright citizenship. But the order says that 1) a single parent who is a citizen makes the child a citizen, so someone born to a citizen and a non-citizen on US soil is still a citizen and 2) this only takes effect after thirty days, so to any eight-nine months pregnant illegal immigrants out there, give birth sooner!

[@analeeceska5224]

You think I’ll affect the older generation too in general?

[@AureusWeaver]

@@analeeceska5224 From the order: "(b) Subsection (a) of this section [the new policy] shall apply only to persons who are born within the United States after 30 days from the date of this order." The older generation won't get citizenships revoked.

[@Anvilman]

What a tyrant, ignoring the Constitution like that. Can't believe that American voters were so stupid.

[@dondahighhh12]

@@analeeceska5224 absolutely not.

[@adeonn]

​@@Anvilmanwell, fascism is better than a black woman, right? (I hope it's clear that I'm being sarcastic)

[@divermike8943]

My brother once supported this idea saying your parents should have to be citizens for you to be a citizen. I said be careful what you wish for. I had done genealogy research for fun & learned our parents never had birth certificates. They were born at home by a midwife and nobody back in those days bothered to tell the government they just had a child. It was not required. No social security numbers back then either. That didn't come until 1936 and only if you were working, not stay at home moms. FYI non-citizen green card holders get a SS# too, so that they pay SS taxes. Not that anyone in our family needed a green card. He never mentioned THAT again. If you are younger ask yourself this; did your grandparents ever have a birth certificate? Does that invalidate your parents citizenship and therefore yours? What about your great grandparents? How far back does this have to go? How else can your PROVE you are a citizen to say get a passport for the first time except proof that you were born here? 🤔😯

[@phoenix9531]

I guess you convinced him, but that he changed his mind as soon as and purely because it benefited him, is kinda a cheap way to arrive at a conclusion about granting someone rights.

[@pato20995]

I don't really see how that matters. It's not the 50's anymore, everything is digitalised. People should not get birthright citizenship, you have citizenship, this is not relevant to you or your brother. Furthermore, whether they had a birth certificate or not, does not change the fact that they were legal citizens, unless of course they were immigrants.

[@tigeruntamed6036]

This is irrelevant if your brother and you have documents. Also nobody is digging that far just to see if you have the correct paperwork so to speak

[@grahamstation7640]

....my grandma parents have a birth certificate but it's more like a card my great grand mother had a certificate..although it was pretty much a paper with all necessary details but yes the usa still accepted that Your story doesn't add up at all

[@GlaDos321]

Meanwhile my father escaped communist Asia by coming to America by signing every single piece of paperwork, filling out loads more paperwork, finding a Catholic American missionary to help him translate and even then he made sure to dot his Is and cross his t's to make sure he had social security, credit, a valid license, birth certificate etc. Sounds to me like your grandparents were just lazy and didn't put the work in to making sure they have citizenship.

[@dejaypage1575]

So wouldn’t that make his wife and kids also not citizens? Since wasn’t Melania an immigrant?

[@TangerraCillaro]

No, they’re white.

[@dejaypage1575]

@ still migrants

[@Victor-fq6lz]

Because they are legal immigrants?

[@TangerraCillaro]

@@dejaypage1575 and you know that’s not the point of what they’re trying to do.

[@WeezyOld]

@@Victor-fq6lz She now is but literally by his own wording this would apply to both his son and wife. Barron was born months before melanie got her citizenship and was only allowed to stay domestically because of the birth. Had she given birth in her country of origin (bc again she was already being pushed to leave bc visas have time limits) Baron would have to apply for US citizenship despite his dad. Trump stated he wants to go after people who abuse having kids to get citizenship. If he is telling the truth (like he always is...) then this applies to them. Hope this clears up the confusion

[@apw9929]

The particularly insane thing is if this is retroactive. How many people can prove their grandparents or great-grandparents were here legally?

[@redwitch95]

It would also strip basically all African-Americans of citizenship, given that this amendment was created explicitly to grant them citizenship. It would be insane, but the Republicans are willing to overturn interracial marriage so... who knows. It'd also be an international crime to strip people of their citizenship if they have no alternative citizenship available, but that's never stopped an American president from doing something.

[@ErikDayne]

Not many. A lot of people like to talk about how their ancestors came here legally, but what they leave out is that doesn’t mean they came here with visas and passports, it means America didn’t require documentation for immigration back then. The ethic slur “WOP” is literally short for WithOut Papers to describe people who immigrated here without documentation.

[@angelitabecerra]

I'm desperately trying to figure this out with a Mexican grandfather...

[@schiefer1103]

Funny thing: we can prove trumps ancestor came to the U.S. illegally, and if they made this retroactive, Trump would no longer be a natural-born citizen, and thus no longer eligible for presidency of the United States of America.

[@idontwantahandlethough]

I know I can't! I don't even know how I'd go about doing such a thing!

[@Ryvucz]

The thing people want Is to fix the problem of people coming in for children, and then complain that we are splitting up their family.

[@mordechaistern1624]

Exactly, no one is splitting them up, you have the choice to leave your family or take them back to where you came from.

[@Twink6629-lg3te]

^well when your a refugee from a war or your country is inherently unsafe to be at the word “choice” to describe those tough life or death decisions is really an underplay of what these people are going through

[@Beremor]

Please prove that there are migrants coming to the U.S. for the express purpose of having U.S. citizen children.

[@Magnetroman]

It will be interesting. Most americans are citizens because they were born in the USA. What else do they have? Their parents also born here? Not enough I am afraid. If they can't prove citizenship, you can't. Recently immigrated families may be able to point to a rightful citizenship. But the descendents of the pilgrim fathers? Did the Pilgrim Fathers have proper immigration status?

[@PhotonBeast]

I know you're being sardonic, but, yeah, how far back is "good enough". As for the pilgrims, no, they were refugees coming to North America. And, had the indigenous people of the area not welcomed them in and helped them out during that winter, they would have just straight up died from starvation and cold.

[@Magnetroman]

@@PhotonBeast You can call me sarccastic but this is the consequence of denying birtright citizenshio without replacing it by another legitimation. Yes. And they were basically trespassing on native land. Only the natives didn't kow how to deal with it in a modern way so they didnt oppose but also didn't give them legal status. . Their refugee status was shady. They were _not_ persecuted in the Netherlands where they previously lived. In fact they felt too welcome. Members of the group started to mingle with the locals and the leaders wanted to prevent that. They were _Jim Jones_ refugees, one might say.

[@PhotonBeast]

@ To be clear, the mention of sarcasm/sardonicism was not meant as an insult, merely an observation on my part as to how I was interpreting tone. And it was not intended as a negative observation - I'm from New England; sarcasm and sardonicism is basically the same thing as a neutral tone for me :)

[@Zetirix]

@@PhotonBeast Same question I have, my family came over before the CW, when do I or my family get to be called "native"? Never?

[@jonathanwessner3456]

@@PhotonBeast remember, DT said "Deportations will happen, regardless of citizenship" We are only US citizens because we were born here. Which would technically mean only naturalized citizens would be US citizens, because they have paperwork proving it...

[@kendallwilson8892]

The statement that we are more of a country of settlers than immigrants...huh? I have NEVER met an American White person who can trace 100% of their ancestory to an early settlement like the Mayflower - and that's still immigration. My native American boyfriend however is truly not an immigrant, but I don't think these people like that any better.

[@XBluDiamondX]

It's just nonsense anyway. Everyone's ancestors migrated from somewhere. Even natives from this side of the planet came from Asia during the ice age.

[@MlleSara2]

​@@XBluDiamondXbut what was their STATUS?!

[@templarw20]

Insert Good Place "You get why that's worse, right?" image...

[@coolnerdlll6053]

There is not a single person on this planet whose ancestry goes back to American soil. Native Americans came here over a land bridge between Russia and Alaska. This argument could not possibly make less sense.

[@SamSnyder-td7pu]

@@kendallwilson8892 there new are studies showing that modern day native Americans were likely not the first people here based on footprints found in New Mexico. Also the history of native Americans was of constant colonizing pillaging and land stealing. This idea of a unified Native American people is historically false.

[@bee-here]

The truly frustrating thing is it doesn't matter if anything they want to do is legally allowed. They'll make it allowed and ignore the law.

[@poeterritory]

And the supporters will cheer it on. Bizarre.

[@JacobNintendoNerd99]

"But my lord... Is that... Legal?" "I will make it legal."

[@bee-here]

@poeterritory They think anything done by the politicians they support won't hurt them. It's the "cheap eggs and tariffs" blindness.

[@poeterritory]

@@bee-here Yep. They only care if it affects them. Which says more about them than Trump.

[@bee-here]

@ I think it's worse than that: they only care if they *think* it affects them, not realizing that a lot of the time, it affects them without them knowing it.

[@maloneaqua]

1:26 it is so exhausting watching legal scholars and practitioners discuss what Donald Trump may be referring to it any given point in time when very likely he is absolutely not referring to anything contextually significant - he's just talking

[@kosatochca]

He’s already signed an executive order directing the executive branch to not treat children of illegal immigrants as citizens. Most probably this executive order will be challenged in courts

[@beeniebaby4863]

As predictable, your assertion (already) didn't age well.

[@Fafnd]

Honestly he just likes to hear the sound of his own voice so he just takes in air and breaths out noxious fumes.

[@willsweird]

Just as a note, the Civil War came first. THEN the abolishment of slavery.

[@steelgunsuit]

Thank you. I agree with this videos content. But I feel it should be Accurate.

[@digitalmike330]

Remember when this mattered: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore, Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!'"

[@quacknaround]

It's an empty promise and always has been.

[@luisa.acevedo3326]

Just some artistic expression by an activist on a statue given by a foreign power.

[@MunchKING]

Now it says "No Vacancies". What movie was that? Die Hard?

[@AndyCroat-v6d]

That was because there was an enormous swath of land to be settled and they needed worker bees. Pretty words, brutal conditions.

[@Stinkehund]

@@MunchKING Lethal Weapon 4, 1998

[@jonfr]

"We have to have rules and regulations" - says the man that has a career in breaking all the laws he can and all the regulations too.

[@cmdraftbrn]

thats career not carrier. hoping thats a spellcheck thing

[@shaunmcisaac782]

@@cmdraftbrn Honestly Carrier fits. You could load up a modern supercarrier with just documents from Trump's court cases and have no room for the planes.

[@JerichoDeath]

@@shaunmcisaac782 I thought you were going to say "carrier", as in, disease carrier.

[@FriedRice3519]

@@cmdraftbrn “s-spellcheck ☝️🤓🪰” no argument lmao

[@RSHori]

The information presented at 2:15 is false. The abolishment of slavery across the United States only happened with the introduction of the 13th Amendment, which only went into effect in late 1865. After the conclusion of the Civil War. The emancipation proclamation in 1863 only freed slaves in rebelling states (i.e. the confederacy), slavery in three union states (Missouri, West Virginia and Maryland) was still legal at this point. In fact Lincoln could not outright abolish slavery, the only thing that could at the time was a constitutional amendment. To which cooperation of some slave state was required. The correct sequence of events is infact: Start of the Civil war followed by the Emancipation Proclamation followed by the end of the Civil War followed by the thirteenth amendment.

[@lynb2039]

Thank you. FINALLY SOMEONE THAT KNOWS TRUE HISTORY AND SHARES IT OPENLY

[@mr.dantastic5073]

@@lynb2039 Why are you acting as if that correction invalidates every other part of the video?

[@lynb2039]

@mr.dantastic5073 the video production presents misinformation and bias. Imo, the AUDIENCE shd be the barometer of its message. And as I witnessed, many were swayed by this bias and incorrect history. It IS challenging to be properly, correctly informed - it takes work. Only a very few commenters shared accurate US history, and those, I applaud. Such as the commenter who ACCURATELY shared this factual sequence of events in US history: CIVIL WAR>EMANCIPATION>END OF CW>13TH AMENDMENT. I'm RESPONDING not acting. I'm criticizing inaccuracies, not condemning. Im also very frustrated by the overall naviety of US history by majority of posters.

[@John-tr5hn]

Well, if you want to get technical, Texas isn't a US state at all, because it was never admitted into the United States through any means recognized or described by the Constitution.

[@LesserAndrew]

Exactly! I highly recommend the book The Demon of Unrest for anyone who thinks the Civil War started because Lincoln banned slavery. The war was fought over slavery, but the reasons it started when it did are more complicated. In fact, the Emancipation Proclamation was only necessary because slavery was still legal at the time, and it only applied to "States and parts of States" that were in rebellion.

[@joancooney7724]

If Trump wants to end birth right citizenship then he should remove his son Barron first

[@blakekaveny]

All of his children except Tiffany

[@thEannoyingE]

Removed his wife next.

[@kyle857]

Trump is a citizen so it wouldn't apply. His son is also a citizen by blood.

[@azmidlyf]

I was wondering the same thing. Melania gained her citizenship in July of 2006, and Barron was born in March of 2006.

[@TheRealBatCave]

​@@azmidlyfi dont get it, what r u sayin

[@blazernitrox6329]

11:46 That was a _beautiful_ bit of politics by Sen. Padilla. He sets up the Nominee with a question that he knows the answer to AND that he knows _she_ won't admit in public, thus forcing her into a position where she has to either lie, say the quite part out loud, or claim that she needs to re-read a document that any nominee for Attorney General should already be _very_ familiar with. In all three cases, she's _screwed._

[@terrancecloverfield6791]

I don't know. Padilla is terminal blue...and it's not like senators are nonpartisan in this matter, especially when it comes to immigration issues. Bondi isn't going to lose anymore votes than before...

[@coolnerdlll6053]

More of that from the Dems, please. That's how they chip away at this disaster.

[@KhisanthMagus]

How is she screwed? She will still be confirmed.

[@ajasen]

screwed? Trump wants her in the cabinet, and the GOP Senate in power will obey Trump. This is just political grandstanding by Democrats, accomplishing nothing.

[@TheTechnoPilot]

Well that’s assuming sadly that these hearings are anything but performative because it would assume any member of the GOP held a form of ethics which they don’t.

[@hioshimtsu]

Never underestimate the power of racism. There is a reason for this whole thing. To remove and takeover whats there. To also control whoever comes into the county. Let see how this works out if it happens.

[@alexanderdumas870]

Opening up migration to the rest of the world in the 60s was the most disastrous immigration disaster of all time, this is a return to form.

[@sillyking1991]

I mean, or we could just not let it happen. Then we dont ha e to worry about seeing how it works out

[@Brindale]

I still remember back in november when my coworkers were saying I was overexaggerating when I said "if he gets elected I'm not an American anymore"

[@idiotically-everything]

Wait, if being born in the US isn’t enough, doesn't that mean Trump should lose citizenship? I mean birthright citizenship applies to a child whose parent is a citizen of U.S. or someone born on the soil. Also, Trump's own mom is a scottish immigrant...

[@marygoround1292]

No, because his ancestors are from the white...sorry right countries.

[@dionh70]

What makes you think that logic has anything to do with this?

[@ford-wp1yq]

What the other guys said, it should also apply but wouldn't cus privilege

[@alexzais1935]

Barron and Melania are getting deported for sure 😆

[@daveb8598]

@@dionh70 Well if you want to actually go back on the chain, his dad's parents were not citizens when they had Fred, so Fred was not a citizen, which means dj trump though born on US soil, would himself not be a citizen and ineligible to hold the office if he undoes birthright citizenship.

[@dreamcanvas5321]

Nothing says "I'm a profoundly stupid racist" quite like "Well, if they have children here who grow up their entire lives as part of our culture and society....won't they be loyal to the origin countries of their birth parents?!?" Literally terrified of infants. That shit belongs on The Onion, not Newsweek, and it's author deserves ridicule not consideration.

[@lominero5]

Why aren't their parents' citizens? Nothing stops them from earning citizenship when they grow up, either. My parents and I are migrants to the US. We all earned citizenship. Other countries don't just give it to you for being born on their land. Stop being naive.

[@NoriMori1992]

@@lominero5 That has diddlysquat to do with anything OP said.

[@NoriMori1992]

@@lominero5 What the shit do "other countries" have to do with anything? The US isn't other countries. It doesn't have to do what they do. (A principle which conservatives usually seem quite proud of!) There can be reasons that the US should do something the way "other countries" do it, but you have to actually say what those reasons are, it's not enough to just point out that "other countries do it". Countries don't all have to do all things the same way. And besides, as the video points out, the US is far from the only country with birthright citizenship! So if we were using your logic, it would be _just as accurate_ to say "other countries DO just give it to you for being born on their land, so the US should keep doing it too"!

[@JimboRustles]

Why is this such a far-fetched concept for you? There are even many third and fourth born generations where that applies to.

[@DevinHeida]

I agree with the statement, but ive also argued before with people who were born in another country, came here at a super early age and have spent 90% of their life here, still argue that their country of birth is their home.

[@moopert86]

It's ridiculous that he thinks he can just rewrite a constitutional amendment to suit his whims. And that the supreme court may go along with such bold violations of the oath he will take to protect the constitution...

[@christopherc8563]

You do understand that the constitution was literally written to be edited? I don't like the guy, but it's literally the point

[@mma93067]

Ehh.. the fact that it’s the 14th “amendment” means that it wasn’t in the original constitution either. That said only congress has the power to do so. Not the president.

[@Dram1984]

@@moopert86 like Biden just trying to declare a new 28th constitutional amendment?

[@willy8d898]

The supreme Court and Congress neither have the ability to modify the Constitution. Check your founders We the people, we the power Our founders certainly didn't give the power to a centralized authority

[@dejaypage1575]

This is likely gonna baxkgire

[@StochasticUniverse]

8:36 The thing about this idea is that a large number of White Americans, whose ancestors immigrated from Europe, had their first natively born American ancestors well before their ancestors achieved permanent residency or naturalized citizenship, which is a process that takes 10+ years for almost everyone. Thus, their 2nd generation American ancestors would need to have undergone a naturalization process in order to be birthright citizens, according to this theory, and they never did because they were presumed native at the time (and one does not naturalize a native, obviously). Therefore, under this dubious legal theory, many White American presidents (quite possibly including Trump) may have been illegitimate, as they would not have descended from any ancestors who qualify as "natively-born", lol. Furthermore, if you want to be really obstinate about it, it's possible that most White Americans are literally not citizens of the United States, being instead the spawn of a longrunning European invasion that played out over hundreds of years. :P I am a 42-year-old, 100% genetically White American whose ancestors have lived in the United States since it was a motley collection of British colonies. I don't know which, if any, of my ancestors naturalized before giving birth, but I know for a fact that a bunch of them had kids before they had lived in the US for at least 10 years, so it's likely that at least a good chunk of my ancestors fit into the same category as Kamala Harris's. If Kamala Harris is disqualified, I may be disqualified, too, and I have _documented_ ancestors who fought in the American Revolution (I live in Massachusetts and my people have been here for hundreds of years). This argument is an absurdity that potentially strips most Americans of their citizenship and is obviously, on its face, farcical and unserious. It's a polemical attempt to invalidate the valid, and like most such gambits, it is flatly insane.

[@drmadjdsadjadi]

Only 1 state (Massachusetts) had zero slaves when the Constitution was written. The 3/5 compromise was thus really NOT between “slave states” and “free states” but rather between “states with a lot of slaves” and “states with relatively few slaves.” We really need to emphasize this because it isn’t as though the North was slave-free in 1790 since it wasn’t. Pretending that slavery was nonexistent in the North from the inception, which is what the whole “slave state” vs “free state” narrative tends to imply to people massively mischaracterizes just how illiberal and immoral the US was just about everywhere at the time of the Constitutional Convention.

[@weetdirt]

We can't forget Manasseh Cutler declared that the Northwest Territory would have no slaves or else would have blood in 1787. Abolitionism was a big deal in new england (Vermont demanded that they be allowed to remain slave free before joining the US)

[@shaunmcisaac782]

The North didn't really embrace chattel slavery in the same way as the South, and it was thought that barring the import of African slaves would eventually diminish the slave population over time to make the issue irrelevant. The North got hoodwinked; captive slaves breed just fine and it wasn't going to end on its own.

[@SimonBuchanNz]

Really not sure what your point is here? What's the "... And therefore..."?

[@SEAZNDragon]

Hate to give Eastman credit but he’s not wrong about the 3/5 compromise blunting slaveholder influence. The abolitionists had a dilemma: they did not want the slave states padding their congressional representation numbers with their slave population while not treating them as human but also wanted the slaves counted as people. So the 3/5 compromise ended being the legislative equivalent of saying, “Fine! You get to use your slaves but not all of them!”

[@retsaMinnavoiG]

While technically correct 'they had slaves in the North'... most of the North was more or less anti-slavery but it wasn't enshrined in law and generally the treatment of the slaves and scale of that slavery was much less in the North. I'm not trying to say, North good South bad but I just want to be sure people understand that there is a difference between 'yeh, a little bit' compared to 'it was the economy'.

[@AuntieHauntieGames]

Wouldn't defining immigrants as "invading enemy combatants" and declaring "war" against them also constitute a declaration of war against the country or countries they are emigrating from?

[@coolnerdlll6053]

Yes. Yes it would. This is his excuse for declaring war on whatever country he wants to.

[@sevret313]

Trump is immune from any consequences thanks to the SCOTUS so he can just do whatever, nothing matters anymore.

[@barrykennedy8507]

Listening to the speech yesterday there were a few things that stood out. 1. declaring a national emergency at the southern border, 2. categorizing cartels as terrorist organizations and also a mention of American being an expanding nation again and acquiring new territories. I'm concerned he's going to try some shit with Mexico.

[@plektosgaming]

@@barrykennedy8507 Not that Mexico could DO anything about it. So we'll soon likely see a lot of Reagan era interventions in other nations.

[@AustinWestbro]

My girlfriend of 4 years was born here and is every bit American as anyone else. To think racists want to send her to a third world country she has never been to is terrifying and disgusting. During Trump’s first term she faced so much hatred from emboldened white supremacists. I’m worried about what we’re going to have to deal with now.

[@andrewkeyes5927]

It's time to elope I guess sorry man

[@ShadowwingMD]

If you love her: Marry her. Or does that not solve the right to stay in the US, if she is your wife? I'm not from the US so I do not know your laws.

[@coolnerdlll6053]

Do whatever you can to stay together. Never let something like this get in the way of love.

[@Rkay421]

@@ShadowwingMDno that’s right if they marry she can’t be deported

[@Ikuraga]

@@ShadowwingMDwut? She was born here so she is American. They trying to change that but that makes no sense. What makes an American if not a person born in America? You are where your lineage is I guess? But that makes no sense because no American is lineage from America unless Native American. So it makes no sense. Lol.

[@Clover298]

Hot take: The US government having the power to revoke someone’s citizenship is not really a good thing

[@PGHDude]

Soooo if you are against Birthright citizenship then everyone minus Native Americans needs to leave. Buuuuuuut what they really mean is; if you’re white you’re a citizen and you’re good. If you’re anything but white you’re questionable. I’m so fed up with these bigots. All because a black man became president.

[@Kanal-yh5xi]

You know you can just apply for citizenship, right? It's not like you *have* to enter the USA illegally.

[@MyLadyLuna]

​@Kanal-yh5xi That doesn't magically get rid of their points. Birthright is something that protects children, yet you who is presumably one who whines about protecting the children wants to annihilate it?

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

@@Kanal-yh5xi Cool... Then return to the Crown. America is not all real nation by then.

[@ErikDayne]

Yeah I mean let’s be honest, statistically there are more Europeans on visa overstays than their are Mexicans who illegally crossed the border, and yet we all know who they’re talking about when they talk about illegal immigrants.

[@nanotech1921]

@@Kanal-yh5xithe US has some of the most tedious citizenship process though, it can take AWHILE before your accepted as a citizen if your considered to be of a foreign nation Oh and god forbid your a child

[@Blazieth]

Let's be honest with ourselves, from this point on, "The Law" is what they say it is. There is no one left to hold them accountable by legal means. They have taken control of every arena that matters. And mark my words, they will never again let go of it willingly or peacefully. Y'all didn't just open the gates of hell, you jumped though.

[@Vonononie]

The checks and balances of the arms of government no longer work

[@Immudzen]

Glad I left.

[@sailorloon348]

While I agree with the sentiment, blaming the voting population in a country that actively does everything they can to stop people from voting (including people being able to get fired over taking time off to vote) isn't going to get us anywhere...

[@AdanSolas]

Good.

[@KS-PNW]

You can't give in to defeatism, there's value to fighting these fights even if we lose.

[@biocapsule7311]

Someone should tell him that law applies to him as well. I guarantee you he will explicitly make his overreach applying to brown people only or to exempt white people.

[@thanos6346]

We’ve seen that it doesn’t. He’s allowed to pick his jurisdiction to be tried by sham judges who he put in power.

[@LDrosophila]

no law applies to Trump

[@MrSHURIKENCHO]

And how would that happen? Love how you just put words in his mouth and make that the reason you hate him for

[@jasper8293]

"No, only *those* immagrants!" The same way they ignore the fact Elon Musk wasn't born in the US...

[@MrSHURIKENCHO]

@@jasper8293 How come you people act like legal and illegal immigration is the same thing?

[@andreaarchambeau9499]

Imagine, excluding citizenship the same people that you stole the land from.

[@DiegoHernandez-tw3vt]

So all illegal immigrants built the country? Alright

[@viefcheesecake]

The US won that land in a war against Mexico. All land is won through war. What do you think the natives did? No human alive can lay claim that their land was stolen. Regardless, getting rid of birthright citizenship is ridiculous

[@WretchedIcon]

I don’t think laws mean anything anymore. At least for the oligarchs.

[@poeterritory]

They are merely suggestions and guidelines.

[@WeezaY5000]

"The Constitution means what the Supreme Court says it means" is going to be said a lot over the next 4 years. It is how they will get everything they want.

[@shreeyamittal1771]

Love that the immigrants who voted for Trump because they wanted to limit competition from their fellow countrymen in the American job market are also the ones getting kicked out first. I'm not saying this is a good situation obviously, or even that it's fair, but the Lions Eating Faces Party coming for the faces of some of those who voted for them feels almost poetic. Stay strong, folks!

[@lgbtthefeministgamer4039]

you had the self awareness to add the caveat, you could have also had the self awareness to not gloat about people getting hurt

[@TheWhiteBamba]

It's called karma. Don't get me wrong, I think Trump is delusional. And those you mentioned, who voted for them for the reason you mentioned, may well bear the fruits of Trump's delusional labour.

[@Jesse-in3pd]

Always love seeing the seething contempt from the left against minorities who don't fall into line. US citizens voted him into office, retroactive citizenship revocation is purely a deliberately dishonest interpretation of law precedence.

[@vikkimcdonough6153]

@@lgbtthefeministgamer4039 They voted for him. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[@sandyr5407]

Trump: *laughs* "Thank you for being so dumb."

[@Mix1mum]

Damn, Liz has been a SOLID addition to your Eagleteam®, Devin. That was what 23min of dense information delivered pretty much without error, with distinct inflection and rhythm to keep the brainrot at bay. Not an easy thing to do, as we all know. Well done, Liz. Mad respect.

[@utha2665]

The only thing I objected to was nely 2.5 mins of Trump. I had to skip that part 🤮

[@lolomak8052]

For everyone watching, In conclusion: it all depends on what the supreme court decides is constitutional and if you think it’ll be fine just go and look at the Supreme Courts judges

[@StorytellerWMD]

I will never understand how this guy was even allowed to run for a second term. That he won is disgusting enough, but how was he even allowed to run?!

[@josephang9927]

Agree, democracy is terrible

[@mad9517]

Ya I much prefer a one party system like China or Russia. No choice at all.

[@StorytellerWMD]

@mad9517 you can have choices without one of them being a convicted felon is all I am saying.

[@seand.g423]

Because the Dems Darling Merrick Garland decided that letting a convicted felon run again "set a better precedent" than holding a former president accountable.... But hey, admitting something like _that_ would make it harder to call it "constructive" to look down on everyone around you...

[@ethangibson8645]

He appointed a majority of the supreme Court. That's how. It's also funny how it took them less than a week to decide TikTok but years to decide Trump

[@cjmars822]

Cool! If I’m not a citizen, I’m not paying taxes. Not my country, not my problem

[@erikburzinski8248]

Birthright citizens still pay taxes

[@MagiRemmie]

@@erikburzinski8248 Yeah and they wouldn't be citizens anymore if Trump took it away. That was the point of OP's comment.

[@cjmars822]

@ they so now, let's see the mental gymnastics needed to justify requiring a non-citizen paying taxes. This is going to be an interesting situation when all is said and done

[@raquelphillips3272]

My friend, non-citizens absolutely do pay taxes. People who make purchases, earn income, own property, etc. in the United States still have to pay taxes regardless of which country they are citizens of.

[@mhug162]

If you work in the US, you pay taxes in the US

[@nathenbutcool]

Next thing you know you'll only be eligible for citizenship if you look a certain way... Good luck America!

[@ladyabaxa]

Look a certain way, belong to a certain social class, and hold certain beliefs.

[@PhotonBeast]

It did happen under some aspects of various Chinese Exclusion Acts, though in those cases, it was specifically targeting Chinese (and other Asians).

[@stephanybrown3226]

I mean he agrees with the German mustache man who started WW2. Someone get me out of this country.

[@AdanSolas]

@@nathenbutcool Impractical. That would most certainly be grounds for a civil disturbance.

[@HPLovecats]

@@nathenbutcool korematsu was never overturned

[@noremac7216]

I'm taking an animal science class, my professor keeps jumping onto politics and he's a big right winger. He loves to laugh about how the Democrats are trying to take our rights away but say that the Republicans are. I do not understand how people can see stuff like this and still think like that

[@Laf631]

He makes absolutely no sense. How do you deport a legal citizen to another country, and why would that other country accept them? But this is what happens when a third of the nation can't get off their ass to vote and lets another third vote in an insane man with no respect for or understanding of the law.

[@mariomitchell2864]

It does make sense. There's no way someone can just enter a country illegally, then have children there, and everyone is now American. You could even come on a visiting visa, have kids, then boom. American. It's a loophole in the system. Citizenship should be by merit to non naturalized parents.

[@chronobretz9511]

I didn't vote because i didn't like either candidate both sides need to put up good middle of the road candidates instead of the far fringes everytime

[@Sonario648]

@@chronobretz9511 Same. Either you vote for one bad candidate, or you vote for the..... other bad candidate who we already had to suffer 4 years of.

[@robertawalsh2995]

@@chronobretz9511Your mommy must have always served your favorite food for dinner.

[@mbcodgie]

​@@robertawalsh2995 no, but she sure didn't serve rotten apples with moldy peanut butter and a cup of lard.

[@c.b.-]

"Invasion by asylum seekers" is such a dystopian concept. Especially when climate change is going to make so many more people need to seek asylum. 🤦‍♀

[@Nolen_Sorento]

They aren't seeking asylum though, they are economic migrants who go back to their country they're "fleeing" from to visit family.

[@Commonsense-u1h]

It's nonsense to say any form of migration is equivalent to an invasion

[@PeterMaranci]

Climate change which American oligarchs CAUSED.

[@samhenley7156]

They're coming here for a reason. If America is their best option, imagine how things are where they come from.

[@LuisVasquez-nu4hu]

Specially when the reason a lot of people seek asylum is because the US put their dirty fingers in their home country's politics 50-70 years ago and installed corrupt, authoritarian regimes from which most countries haven't recovered from. Oh and also climate change is also mostly perpetuated by big, greedy, hyper capitalist US corporations

[@LiamRappaport]

If SCOTUS lets him end it I hope the masses really take action. If we can’t count on a clear and plain reading of the laws and constitution, we can only count on tyranny.

[@TheJmac82]

Let's be honest, like it or not 77m people voted for this. People get stuck in bubbles of their own beliefs and don't realize this isn't an accident, it was the entire point. I feel for these people but even I have to admit as a left leaning moderate that the border issue is a real problem. It is why I sit this election out.

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

​@@TheJmac82They used the border issue to push for racist policies. The border is an issue because the border states don't have enough capacity to take in migrants of this scale. That's it. There is no other good reason to deny them entry, especially those who are already citizens, even those that were born here from illegal immigrant parents. At that point, they have integrated into US society, and aren't burdening the resources used to handle the border crisis. If they are born in the US, they have already integrated enough to pay for the hospital fees, or moved deeper into the US, found a job etc. At that point, what exactly is the issue? Why target birthright citizenship here?

[@WyrmsouI]

​​@@TheJmac82 The border issue has been perpetuated by wealthy elites and corporations so they can benefit from undocumented labor and now, it's fine they are using it as an excuse to take rights away from citizens? Are you sure that's the position you want to take?

[@LiamRappaport]

@@TheJmac82 just because someone voted for trump does not mean that they agree with his every action. Also, if they end birthright citizenship, what’s stopping them from saying whatever marginalized group they dislike is no longer a citizen? What’s stopping them from saying any plainly written law clearly doesn’t mean what it says (like they already did with the immunity decision)?

[@coolnerdlll6053]

It's a dictatorship. They'll just make dissenters "go away" (IYKWIM).

[@apollograyling-hastur3995]

67% majority approval requirement from house and senate AND 67% of the states have to pass it at 67% majority (it’s a 2/3, 2/3, 2/3 thing) 37 states alongside 2/3 of the House, and 2/3 of the senate needs to vote to approve a change of the constitution. (Each state has to pass it at a 2/3 majority for their “vote” in favor to count in this situation)

[@newjerseylion4804]

Why do you lose the right to vote but not a right to a firearm if you’re a felon.

[@superior_non3665]

And why don't you lose the right to run for a political office like some certain president elect we know...

[@OdyTypeR]

That varies by state. Which is a problem.

[@chair547]

you lose the right to a firearm as a felon in every state except vermont. you lose the right to vote as a felon everywhere except vermont, maine, and DC. getting your voting rights back is also much easier than getting your gun rights back in more states

[@justinoxton6790]

@newjerseylion4804 they do lose the right to own, or buy firearms, but depending on the state and the severity of the crime they could reinstate that right

[@kaedatiger]

You lose the right to a firearm if you're a felon but you can regain the right to vote when your parole is over in most states and you can vote from prison in three states.

[@angelitabecerra]

I'm 2nd generation Mexican American. Me and my sister were born here, and our father was born here, so we all have American citizenship. My paternal grandfather was the immigrant and I don't know his immigration status. I fear if this goes through, they'll try to retroactively apply it at some point. I'm 33, almost 34 years old, and have only ever lived in America. I've never even left this country. I'm terrified. Edited for a typo

[@Kanal-yh5xi]

There's no way he can do it retroactively, they don't have the resources for that. But it might work for the future to prevent illegal migrants from legally staying there.

[@angelitabecerra]

​@Kanal-yh5xi Present/future is the first wace. If they manage to get it through they'll try to retroactively apply it at some point. Probably not with this Administration but a future Republican one. With this can of worms open I now have to watch out for my citizenship with every Republican presidency...

[@samc9133]

​@@Kanal-yh5xi Can't they just... Create the resources for that? Didn't that one country in the 1930's/40's do just that? I really don't like this practicality argument, anything is possible.

[@ryanf.587]

@@Kanal-yh5xi There's no way he can do it legally since it's unconstitutional by Supreme Court ruling AND by the plain, clear text of the 14th Amendment. Presidents cannot break the Constitution. Tomorrow, he's literally going to swear an oath to not do exactly that and he can be removed from office if he is found to have broken that oath.

[@doomsdayrabbit4398]

​@@Kanal-yh5xi"there's no way to do it retroactively" tell that to German Jews.

[@Nightingale_time]

"You can't take away my [insert constitutional right here]. It's a constitutional right!" I better see that same energy for others' constitutional rights.

[@tedonica]

You won't though. The fascists have no shame, they don't care about consistency. It's a game to be won to them, not a set of rules to live by.

[@bazzfromthebackground3696]

This is the country of "I got mine."

[@griffinarcher2911]

"You can't take away my right to come here illegally and be unable to remove because I had a child. It's a constitutional right"

[@inspiredglue2056]

@@griffinarcher2911I think it’s more nuanced than that, as we have the resources as a nation to accommodate those immigrants and help them, as many are desperate and need help, which we can offer if we are willing.

[@griffinarcher2911]

@ That doesn't make it any less illegal. Also, I would argue that we don't have enough resources given our healthcare, social security, homelessness etc. How could we go to the extent of ignoring the law like we are wealthy enough to take care of millions who come here when we don't even have enough to take care of ourselves.

[@Max25670]

How can you deport someone to a country that they have never been to?

[@DrippyPootis]

This is some bull, our nation is quite literally built on immigrants, the quote on the bottom of the statue of liberty invites those from distant shores to come here to the land of the free. Somehow though modern Americans seem to forget that they were immigrants once too.

[@lugertelevisioncompany]

Oh my god immigrants 400 years ago. Been here since the mayflower anchored

[@negrevallsette2980]

@lugertelevisioncompany i mean good for you , most of your friend and loved one aren't.

[@martint6097]

since the civil war, about 80% if the immigration was legal. for some reason every comment here about whose ancestors were immigrants does not ask if they were legal or not

[@ford-wp1yq]

​@@lugertelevisioncompanyid like to see you prove it, and, spoilers, if only mayflower descendants were allowed to stay, this country would probably be at 250k ppl, being very generous

[@addeum7766]

​@@martint6097 I'd like to point out the vastly smaller amount of documentation and oversight needed for immigration over a century ago. It was both easier to get required papers and to pass without some of them.

[@joedellinger9437]

There is also the case of Rio Rico, Texas, where a piece of Texas was treated by all as if it were Mexico. The land was later given to Mexico. However people who were born there before that happened later successfully argued that they were US citizens. That is a more recent precedent.

[@bryalogicalgaming5817]

00:59 that's generous of you to believe he thinks before speaking. Nope, he just wants to end birthright citizenship, post dated for the day after Baron Trump was born... but only if Baron does that one favor he asked for.

[@thespectator5259]

I read the EO. It's NOT retroactive, will be in effect 30 days from when signed, and won't apply to kids born to at least ONE American citizen.

[@joshuamelton9148]

As an African Descendants of Slaves (ADOS.) the 14th Amendment was designed in part to protect the newly free blacks who were formerly enslaved. It was not designed for people to come across the border illegally or people who have visas for the sole purpose of having their child in the United States to be granted automatic citizenship. It is something to be revisited.

[@MrColoradorocky]

@joshuamelton9148 - I agree - the 14th Amendment is currently being used to grant citizenship in situations other than those which are of its original intent. The clause "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is and always has been wide open to interpretation. Donald Trump's Executive Order pertaining to the practice of "birthright citizenship" does not conflict with his duty to uphold the Constitution; instead, it is most likely a first step for the Supreme Court to hear new 21st Century arguments to re-interpret an ambiguous clause in the 14th Amendment and decide whether the children of illegal aliens are American citizens.

[@mutantpoptart8060]

He's going to have to change his rhetoric on calling anyone "bad" a criminal since his immigrant wife is married to a natural born convicted felon... which I do believe, makes him a "criminal" who married an immigrant thereby making her a citizen. A "nice young lady" ... married to a criminal.

[@Alex-cw3rz]

The fact that the law might change because the president doesn't even know what it says is baffling

[@marjoe32]

You'll take my 14th amendment after I use my 2nd Amendment.

[@SpoopySquid]

This needs to be a bumper sticker or tshirt

[@jeffreycole2816]

lol. Get ready. They have to go back.

[@shadowqueen6395]

Please do a video on what it means now, after the executive order, for children with one undocumented parent who should have birthright citizenship.

[@joemalo5335]

If unborn children are considered human by some state, wouldn't it be more important where someone was concieved, not born?

[@charleshetrick3152]

At conception a full human DNA chain exists, its human from the start whether any given state chooses to grant it full human rights or not is a different issue.

[@blakekaveny]

@@charleshetrick3152so do you agree with the Alabama Supreme Court saying frozen embryos count as people. Which is ruling not backed by science

[@Gentleman.J.Daniels]

correect my good fellow

[@charleshetrick3152]

@@blakekaveny so if scientist figure out a way to put fully grown humans in suspended animation for prolonged stellar travel do they cease being human? Yes an embryo is human life and we know that, as noted there only exists a question as to when we acknowledge it under the law. This is directly from the Wikipedia re freezing embryos: “Embryos can be frozen at different stages of *development* , such as a single cell, 2-8 cells, or a blastocyst.” I highlighted development because that’s the key, “the science” already acknowledges the cells are replicating which only occurs when a full DNA chain is present.

[@Ghent_Halcyon]

@@charleshetrick3152Indeed the DNA it’s self is human, but like, so is any part of a human.

[@joancooney7724]

Was Barrons mother a legal immigrant when he was born ? No

[@knightsnight5929]

Now, now, she is a former professional lady, have some respect.

[@perkele9994]

trump was a legal citizen, so even with birthright citizenship barron would be a citizen

[@davidl438]

@@perkele9994 That's only if Donald is his biological father.

[@anaceweirdo1579]

​@@perkele9994uh no, cause apparently the mom wasn't a citizen, so it still wouldn't work, use your own rules man. If I can't be considered a citizen because I was born here, neither should baron.

[@wm479]

@@perkele9994Eh, Obama’s mom being a US citizen didn’t stop Trump from claiming Obama wasn’t born as one.

[@DrunkenRhyin]

I can't believe we're going to have to go through 4 more years of this...

[@LikaLaruku]

So glad I'm over 40. One minute I'm decorating for christmas after thanksgiving, then I wake up the next day & it's time to buy Valentines chocolates. For the next 4 years, I will pity the youth who experience time slowly.

[@Bad-Jeans]

A true test of will

[@JoshuaTootell]

Only 4? Are you sure?

[@heathers.9740]

This is why I love this channel. You break everything down in a non-biased way with facts. And since Facebook is not going to fact-check anymore, the public needs this channel.

[@CassidyListon]

This is about as short-sighted as China's One Child Per Family policy.

[@UltraSuperDuperFreak]

That policy has been lifted. And honestly it was a smart move in order to not overpopulate, if that truely was a problem. It was only there for a few decades. No biggie in big picture of earth history of things that has been done.

[@ProdbyNaz934]

I thought your PFP was Emperor Puyi 😂

[@arissamazumder]

@@UltraSuperDuperFreak it wasn't lifted just expanded to three children

[@xnwn]

@@arissamazumder apparently it’s not often enforced anymore. I talked to a few chinese people and they just don’t want kids but they know of a few families in their village with 4 kids and they’re fine. in some parts if china, they’re been encouraging more birthrates by paying families to have more kids because it’s been getting low.

[@reecedeyoung6595]

Why is it short cited? Most of the developed world doesn't have such laws. Only in North America.

[@UnreasonableOpinions]

I'm waiting for the proposal so abjectly insane that the throw to Liz is met with 'No thanks, Devin' and then cut back.

[@MoneyGist]

🤣

[@adrianthoroughgood1191]

You underestimate Liz's power!

[@klisterklister2367]

LOL

[@seattlegrrlie]

This spirals out of control. People who were born here and their parents were born here but did they come here legally three generations back? Where does that line get drawn? Were my father's parents "legal"when they came here in the 1930s?

[@OutdoorLonghair]

Have you seen the Family Guy skit where the cop has a color card? I fear it's going to be like that. I hate this timeline

[@thomashaapalainen4108]

My great grandfather and grandmother came to the US after the wars with the soviet union from Finland. The other half of my family were founders of towns in Massachusetts back in the 1600s it will be untresting to see how this all plays out. If I do get deported to Finland at least I can not worry about paying back my 4000 dollar ambulance ride last year . And I thank my family for making sure I learned the finnish language.

[@ryanf.587]

We keep going down this road, the Nuremberg Laws 2.0 are right around the corner.

[@Avellania]

It reminds of how my greatgrandfather had to prove he was German enough to get married. He had to hand in a family tree than covered more than 10 (!) generations. The US would end up quite empty.

[@ryanf.587]

@ it’s sad that we live to see the days when we’ve come full circle from defeating the Nazis to electing Diet Nazis.

[@devilinthebelfry7292]

I wouldn't have gotten rid of it but people do take advantage of it and that is a problem. I can also understand the argument that this was initially made to nationalize slaves and their offspring and we are very far removed from that situation now.

[@EL-uj1pl]

Conservative policy has always been about treating some people as less than human. What a surprise.

[@doc_vader2776]

Yeah. An illegal person has less rights than a legal person. That's true in every Single country in the world. Not just the USA

[@anaceweirdo1579]

​@@doc_vader2776hey I was born here. But I'm Mexican, so am I an illegal to you? Or what tf is your definition?

[@dr_diddy]

@@anaceweirdo1579 yes, let me breakdown for your kind. legal > ⚪ illegal > 🟤🟡⚫🟠🔴⚪

[@doc_vader2776]

@@anaceweirdo1579 The definition is that you are a citizen if you are born to a citizen. If your parents were US citizens at the time of your birth, Congratulations, you're a citizen too.

[@Atlas-tv9jb]

​@doc_vader2776 'illegal' immigration has only been illegal for about 100 years. So if your parents have been in America longer than that, they'd probably have been considered an illegal immigrant if they'd tried to come to America the same way now. Same for most other western countries.

[@robertbernard7844]

*le sigh* Repeat after me. "Rules for thee, but not for me."

[@soupSpoon-k5h]

Rules for thee, but not for me

[@Gentleman.J.Daniels]

sooooo like biden and hunter?

[@SnuubScadoob]

@Gentleman.J.Daniels Oh buddy. Buddy, buddy. It’s all politicians homie, not just the ones you don’t like. We don’t live in the same world they do.

[@Ghent_Halcyon]

@@Gentleman.J.Daniels Biden literally commit any crimes. It’s the only reason his brother was charged of shit. Of which, what he did wasn’t that bad from what I could find out. Unlike Trump who literally has 30+ felony’s. They followed the rules. Even when Biden did pardon his brother, I think that’s more than justified considering that Trump does his absolute best in being an ass.

[@AmigaSoul]

That this is even a conversation is 2025 mindboggling. Imaging looking back at this time periode in the future - "remember when we arguing about basic human rights?".

[@davescott7680]

You do realise most countries don't have birthright citizenship. You inherit it from parents, not simply because popped out while on holiday.

[@PedroOozeMan]

@@davescott7680Americans who claim they want to be like Europe have zero idea how Europe works

[@planescaped]

We are legit living in a future dystopia from an 80's movie.

[@PedroOozeMan]

@@planescaped so that would mean Europe is a dystopia since they never had birthright citizenship?

[@doomsdayrabbit4398]

​@@davescott7680"most countries" also have a right to healthcare but sure. We'll go with the example of Europe for this one.

[@downtowneddie1]

The child's birth in the U.S. does not change the immigration status of the parents, and they may still be subject to deportation if they are in the country without authorization.

[@lynb2039]

ALL of them.

[@redfoxninja3173]

To Republicans and Trump the Constitution is more... suggestive, open to widespread interpretation, useful whenever politically beneficial or just outright ignoring it when it's a political inconvenience

[@wdf70]

You can say they see the constitution as toilet paper. We're not going to see you as lesser for it.

[@redfoxninja3173]

@wdf70 yea...but that sounds to truthful and political figures don't understand truth as none of them can tell it

[@PhotonBeast]

It is a document they can point to as proof and authority when and as needed to justify the same. To use Innuendo Studios example, it's like when someone does a bad thing in the workplace and people point to company policy and say "We updated company policy."...but otherwise do nothing. Turns out, words on paper isn't action. Might feel good but isn't action. Conversely, the same argument can be used to justify things by deferring to it - "It's not my actions or desires; the policy says so."

[@AdanSolas]

As it should be.

[@darkstarr984]

What’s aggravating is the loud far-right people supporting him like to claim they’re all about the constitution, but the only person on their side I’ve ever seen be for it is Mitt Romney (which is why I supported him in 2016 and also why I was vehemently against Trump).

[@moonverine]

The long-term plan is to revert back to limiting voting rights to only landholders.

[@WeezaY5000]

Good thing Blackrock is buying up all of those single family homes. 😑

[@TipzEOne]

My only question is i wonder how long term. Because Trump said he'd 'fix things' so that (his supporters) won't need to vote anymore. With an activist supreme court, both houses, and the executive branch, there's no checks and balances to really slow anything down now.

[@kamikeserpentail3778]

Then I'd come into a fair amount of land as a ton of conservatives suddenly "retire"

[@WraithAllen]

Isn't it the case that birthright citizenship was a de facto reality prior to the 14th Amendment for white folk in the US? I mean, there was not test, no swearing in ceremony, or any sort of requirement to be recognized as a citizen at birth in the US for white folk before the 14th Amendment, was there? The 14th Amendment just made this explicit and applicable to ALL people born in the US. If birth right citizenship is removed from the Constitution, then won't it be the case that NO ONE BORN in the US will be citizens at birth? Not even the children, grand-children, great-grand-children.... of the conservatives pushing the end of birth right citizenship, right? And how will citizenship then be established for children? What legal framework will apply? Who will enforce it and how? Will we need "citizenship paper" or "national IDs" to prove our citizenship? Will be required to carry our "citizenship papers" everywhere and be subject to police stops where they ask "papers please?" as was the case under Nazi Germany? If so.... those seeking to end it reveal who they really are: racist authoritarians.