Summary

Trump announced plans to end birthright citizenship via executive action, despite its constitutional basis in the 14th Amendment.

He also outlined a mass deportation policy, starting with undocumented immigrants who committed crimes and potentially expanding to mixed-status families, who could face deportation as a unit.

Trump said he wants to avoid family separations but left the decision to families.

While doubling down on immigration restrictions, Trump expressed willingness to work with Democrats to create protections for Dreamers under DACA, citing their long-standing integration into U.S. society.

    • bitchkat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Musk doesn’t have birthright citizenship. As much as we wish he’d just go away, I hope you’re not suggesting they should expand this program to strip naturalized citizens.

      • anomnom@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        1 year ago

        He worked on a student visa after dropping school.

        That’s illegal, so he shouldn’t have qualified for naturalization without correcting that and leaving the country before reapplying.

      • Sam_Bass@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Only thing naturalized about him is his bank account which is what has kept him off the icehouse list

        • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          They will inevitably have a falling out because they are both nepo baby idiots who can’t maintain long term relationships aside from sycophants and bootlickers.

  • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    14th Amendment to the US Constitution

    Section 1

    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      63
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, it’s there, but as we’ve clearly seen, if the law isn’t enforced, or is selectively enforced, it might as well not exist.

      • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hell this exact amendment was openly ignored for nearly a century in that it is also meant to provide equality under the law for all citizens. But Women couldn’t even vote for decades after this amendment was passed. Then there were a ton of laws on the books that were actively enforced that discriminated on race, sex, etc. Women’s Suffrage and the Civil Rights Movement should not have been necessary after this amendment was passed. And yet…

  • UncleJosh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    1 year ago

    My 86-year old mother is house-bound but she is the daughter of two immigrants who came over in the 1910’s, so I guess she’s gonna be shipped off to another country. I have no idea if my brother and I, both in our 50’s would be subjected to deportation considering we haven’t lived with her in over 30 years.

    Maybe the US shouldn’t have elected an out-and-out racist asshole.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m the child of an immigrant and a native-born person. So does half of my citizenship get taken away?

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The lower half. I might lose my penis, but I get to keep my brain.

          Unless this is a vertical bisection of course. Then the left side because I’m left-handed.

          Although I wouldn’t have my right brain hemisphere anymore… Now I’m confused.

    • DacoTaco@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Congrats, nearly everyone in the written history of america are immigrants. Anyone after the declaration ? Gone! Immigrants from first and second world war? Gone! Good old usa! ( /s incase its not obvious)

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s never going to stop surprising me when a politician says he’s going to do something, I tell people, and then he does it but so many people were still caught completely off guard. I imagine this is how many in the UK feel about Brexit.

  • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Anyone in the US who believes they have any sort of legal protection is just delusional. The only protection that exists there is through money.

  • cultsuperstar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    So is he going to stop renting his penthouses in Florida to Russians so they can have babies here to be US citizens? Or does his plan only affect brown people?

    • helopigs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Russians will be granted amnesty because of their willingness to accept our deportations into their labor camps.

      • chaogomu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        As if Trump will share the forced labor.

        No, this is an end run around the 14th and 13th amendments.

        He’s going to round up the brown people and reinstall slavery.

  • rational_lib@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Doesn’t the 14th Amendment pose a problem for that plan?”
    “Not a problem, no one handles amendments like me. 14 amendments is nothing, when I…when I do the Christ stuff before food I do 15, 30, 100 amendments. And people say ‘Wow, you are so good with the amendments, no one does the amendments like you.’ So I got that all taken care of.”

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      He actually already opened an office to review and attempt to take away citizenship from people who already earned it, back in 2020.

    • Srh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Supreme Court in historically (and I can only imagine the current court will be the worst so far) has never been able to count to 14 much less interperate it.

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Okay, we don’t need to go adding extra stupid stuff. At the base level you’re doing their normalization for them. At the high level we need an accurate idea of what’s coming so we can prepare.

    Watching the actual interview it’s clear he makes some assertions. They don’t want to separate families so they will send the US citizens with the family if the family wants. What this generally means is when the parents are undocumented but a kid is a citizen. This interview does not support denaturalizing people, (but he did do that in his first term), or forcing American citizens in a mixed status family who are adults to leave.

    On the 14th the interviewer wanted and got an answer from an 80 year old partially senile man. His first, natural answer to the 14th amendment question was he would go to the people. He only noncommittally said he would look at an EO when then interviewer kept asking him but what about an executive order. If he’s mentioned doing that before the proper way is to bring up what he said before and see if he still holds that position. Not repeating, “but what about an EO” 5 times until you get the funny and the headline writers can celebrate.

    The open question is how will this highly suggestable man fare around the likes of Stephen Miller.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You uh… okay with voiding parts of the Constitution with a vote in Congress? or Executive Order?

      • DankDingleberry@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        im not american, but if youre trying to justify a system where it is extremely difficult to change laws and rules that are outdated or no longer feasable, be my guest.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The entire reason they’re so hard to change is so they don’t get changed on a whim. If it’s in that document it’s because 3/4 of every elected representative in every state thought it was that important. Letting Congress change something like that with a simple majority or filibuster majority is ridiculous and means either party could completely re-write the basis of our laws at will just by changing that document. For example instead of trying to change and enforce every law about marriage and benefits they could simply pass a constitutional change to define marriage conservatively and let the courts go through striking down the now unconstitutional normal laws.

          Making that document hard to change is one of the things America got right.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Why shouldn’t someone born in a country get citizenship regardless of who their parents are?

      Why is punishing a child for what their parents did not completely stupid?

      That’s some apartheid-level shit.

      • DankDingleberry@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        why is this a punishment? do you realize that if you are born on a vacation of your parents, this prevents you from getting citizenship. is this logical to you?

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          do you realize that if you are born on a vacation of your parents, this prevents you from getting citizenship.

          That is absolutely false.