Krashlia wrote:iMURDAu wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Trump is funding it since we're doing fucking wacky conspiracy theories as part of legit political discourse now. Create your own boogeymen and then defeat them = hero.
Trump did nothing after people were microchipped in Wisconsin. Thats my narrative and I'm sticking to it.
The diligence of the microchipping efforts are questionable, or maybe Paul Ryan was out of town that day.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46046870Mr Ryan has previously clashed with the president on issues such as healthcare and immigration, and reportedly finds working with him frustrating.
"You cannot end birthright citizenship with an executive order," Mr Ryan told Kentucky-based radio station WVLK.
"We didn't like it when Obama tried changing immigration laws via executive action, and obviously as conservatives, we believe in the constitution."
Well, yeah - the whole "birthright" thing is part of the constitution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthrigh ... ted_StatesBirthright citizenship in the United States is acquired by virtue of the circumstances of birth. It contrasts with citizenship acquired in other ways, for example by naturalization.[1] Pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), U.S. citizenship is automatically granted to any person born within and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States (known as jus soli).[2] This includes the territories of Puerto Rico, the Marianas (Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands), and the U.S. Virgin Islands.[3][4] Birthright citizenship also applies to children born elsewhere in the world to U.S. citizens (with certain exceptions), known as jus sanguinis.
The policy stems from the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, stating "[a]ll 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," and was meant to override the 1857 Dred Scott v. Sandford decision that denied African Americans citizenship.
Trump, if he were to ever read it, would surely jest, "Holy fuck, you mean we own entire islands of virgins? Is that where dead Saudi journalists go if they repent their fake news?"
The wiggle-room which Trump appears to be focusing on - so much as people are able to focus an ADD-gone-wild case like Trump - is the phrase, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". To me, the amendment is meant to be inclusive, for the sake of US citizens (such-as military folk) who give birth to wee Americans abroad. To interpret it as being exclusive, meaning non-citizens who give birth to wee shit-holers on American soil, creates some problems, because it can't simultaneously be one-way and both ways... if that makes sense.
The problems an exclusive interpretation would cause include:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-b ... challengesMy favourite in that list is Ted Cruz, because:
Cruz was born in Calgary, Canada.[156] Cruz's mother was a U.S. citizen and his father was born in Cuba, but his father eventually became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 2005.[157] This gave Cruz dual Canadian-American citizenship, as he was granted U.S. citizenship at the time of his birth by the virtue of his mother's citizenship, and Canada grants birthright citizenship to every person born in Canada. Cruz applied to formally renounce his Canadian citizenship and ceased being a citizen of Canada on May 14, 2014.
You guys can keep him, by the way. Shove him next to Bieber and, for crying out loud, be sure to wear your earmuffs when within earshot. Safety first, people!
Anyhow... back to the original BBC story,
Trump tweet wrote:Paul Ryan should be focusing on holding the Majority rather than giving his opinions on Birthright Citizenship, something he knows nothing about! Our new Republican Majority will work on this, Closing the Immigration Loopholes and Securing our Border!
Riiiight, so if Trump figures there is a bunch of wiggle-room on that amendment, he is, to put it lightly, very, very, fucking entirely, wrong. The Supremes will see the ramifications coming from a mile away. LIttle things, like:
Wikipedia wrote:A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Well, well, well - a well regulated militia, huh?
In the end, the idea that Trump can modify, or skirt, a part of the US constitution via executive order is up there with his middle-class tax-cut (available November 1st, year not specified).
But, Trump will continue to sell it, so long as it has people MAGA-ing in their pants at his rallies. Americans - you are now all attendees of Trump University, which has just added a constitutional law faculty.
EDIT: For clarity, changed "the phrase is meant" to "the amendment is meant" in the paragraph about the 14th amendment being inclusive vs. exclusive
A quantum state of signature may or may not be here... you just ruined it.