Many Trump fans are originalists so with this we can see if they really believe that or blindly follow Trump. Many will just back him.
The conservative wing of the SCOTUS claims to make their decisions based on the actual text of the constitution. Assuming Trump actually tries this and it makes it to the SCOTUS, it’ll be interesting to see if Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh try to twist themselves into knots to support Trump, or if it would be a 9-0 decision against him.
Well, the authorities at the time were trying to exclude Mr. Wong from returning home in accordance with the law in effect then but I take your point.
Anyhow, the Wong Kim Ark case doesn’t explicitly say that children of people illegally in the US are citizens because there really wasn’t such a class of people at the time. Nonetheless, the plain reading of the text suggests that’s the result and it’s how the law has been applied for decades. The Supreme Court just sort of assumed in dicta without explicitly deciding it in INS v. Rios-Pineda that US-born children were citizens by birth but didn’t explicitly spell that out. Changing this standard would be such a massive and disruptive change, and so contrary to past history and practice, that I think even a judge who thought it was a reasonable construction of the law might hesitate to allow it to be done by just an executive order.
He went on to say, ‘Term limits are bad. The American people… You know they love me. I’m the best president in the history of the world. They don’t want anyone else. They want… I have very, very good brains. I have the best brains. So this so-called “22nd Amendment”… It doesn’t apply to me because the American people… We don’t need it. People are saying I can do it with an Executive Order. It’ll happen. MAGA!’
My wife was born in the US to non-citizens. Her parents went on to become citizens, and my wife went on to study hard in school, work her ass off, get an MD, go through residency, go through fellowship, and provide excellent medical care to thousands of patients for a couple of decades. Along the way she met me and we had two children together.
I guess she’s not one of us though.
I know this isn’t the forum for this, but, fuck you, Trump voters. Fuck all of you.
Lindsey Graham says that he’s going to introduce legislation in support of ending birthright citizenship.
So it’s not just the Mango Mussolini who’s on about this.
Jesus Christ.
Graham’s approach, at least, is proper. He’s certainly empowered to introduce legislation to deal with things that he thinks are societal issues. He may be wrong-headed or even evil, but he’s empowered to do so. It leads to a debate among the congress - and therefore the citizenry - about the issues.
Executive order, however, is just wrong.
He’s an honorary, posthumous citizen. It’s in the constitution. Somewhere. 
Graham is not empowered to do this, any more than Trump is. Neither the Executive nor the Legislature can unilaterally change the Constitution.
Man, I got all the way to the end of this before I realized that you made that up!
(You did, right?)
What are those issues?
Oh, a couple wealthy Chinese people come over to give birth in the US so their child will be a US citizen? How is that a problem?
And how is it a problem when a kid born in the United States becomes a US citizen? What problems are created when this happens? The parents aren’t citizens, and are here illegally. OK, we can’t deport that kid to Mexico, because he’s a US citizen who has never set foot in Mexico. And this is a problem for what reason?
Trump probably figures he has at least 4 Supreme court votes for anything he does. So he figures why not roll the dice and try to get Roberts too?
Because it means you are “rewarding” law breakers. It’s one of the core conservative ideas–that family units are UNITS. Rewarding parents by making their kids citizens encourages them to come here. It’s the same thinking that argues that say, if you were the innocent party in a divorce then you shouldn’t have to pay child support because it’s not fair that “she” cheated and now “she” gets the money–there’s no gap between parents and kids in some people’s minds.
He is perfectly within his rights to introduce a possible amendment for consideration. Now, there’s no way such an amendment would get two-thirds of both houses of Congress and three-fourths of the States to ratify, but beginning with legislation in the Congress is a perfectly valid way to begin the attempt.
Now, anything short of an actual amendment in terms of legislation should be dead on arrival. Knowing Graham, I’m sure it’s actually that.
a lot of conservatives are such big fans of families they have 2 or 3 of them, just like Trump or Gingrich or Reagan or Rudy G, etc.
However he may propose legislation that leaves the 14th intact but narrowing down what does “and subject to the jurisdiction” mean. Whether he gets laughed out of the room is another story.
Now, sure, it is The Way We Do Things that if the Constitution says “to qualify for A, a person must meet conditions X and Y” then you can’t just statutorily add “…and Z too” — but that doesn’t keep them from trying.
You’re right. This isn’t the forum for this. Dial it way back.
[/moderating]
Nice to see Republicans embracing changing the Constitution by executive order. I’m sure they will be consistent when President Kamala Harris alters the second amendment.