this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
267 points (94.1% liked)

politics

19090 readers
2767 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy said Friday he would deport the children of undocumented immigrants with their families, despite them already being U.S. citizens.

“There are legally contested questions under the 14th Amendment of whether the child of an illegal immigrant is indeed a child who enjoys birthright citizenship or not,” Ramaswamy said after a town hall in Iowa.

Ramaswamy is not the only GOP candidate to question U.S. citizenship rules. Former President Trump announced in late May that on his first day back in office, he would seek to end birthright citizenship by way of an executive order.

top 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] omgitsaheadcrab@sh.itjust.works 86 points 1 year ago (5 children)

An immigrant, in a country of immigrants, deciding he doesn't like those that came after... 🤷🏼‍♂️

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In the “Law and Order” party, but thinks you can override the Constitution by executive order

[–] mustardman@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They are also strict constitutionalists except all the places they are strictly not.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago

Truly the story of America, but not in the good way.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Nah he isn’t an immigrant, he’s all ours. His parents are immigrants though. He’s as American as chili on spaghetti.

[–] SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nah he isn’t an immigrant, he’s all ours. His parents are immigrants though.

So he's trying to get rid of the way of getting citizenship as he got his?

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I think his parents are naturalized, so no

[–] GreenMario@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Nuh uh I didn't see his long form birth certificate. He looks like a Ubeki-beki-bekistan.

[–] doublejay1999@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

A truly spoilt bastard. Pulling up the ladder.

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

He’s a pawn getting paid to throw his own kind under the bus. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a actual deal made for him to run as the token immigrant, with specific dollar amounts.

[–] kitonthenet@kbin.social 51 points 1 year ago (3 children)

You do realize that birthright citizenship is almost entirely nonexistent in Europe, Asia, Africa, and Austrailia, right?

at no point in the history of america has "but yurop does it" been a suitable justification for a policy. We are specifically trying to be better than europe

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Failing spectacularly I might add.

[–] Soulg@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

He did say trying, not succeeding.

[–] felykiosa@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I m French and this is complete bullshit . If you re birth in France you are French at your 18 birthday.

[–] kitonthenet@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

This was originally meant to be a reply to a guy down the thread, but they deleted it before I posted so it showed up here. You can find the context down there too!

[–] JdW@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We are specifically trying to be better than europe

were perhaps. If we're being generous. But "are" has not applied in decades, and most definitely not this millenium.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 45 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

I'm going to be honest, I'm not a fan of birthright citizenship either. I believe a person born in the US should need at least one parent to be a citizen or lawful permanent resident in order to obtain citizenship, and the system as currently set up is routinely abused (See the Chinese tourist industry as an example). But my personal opinion directly conflicts with the Constitution, and guess which one matters?

There's absolutely no ambiguity here. The Constitution clearly states that any person born on US soil is a US citizen, full stop. There are no disqualifiers listed. Doesn't matter where your parents came from. Doesn't matter if they just showed up in the US 5 minutes ago. If they were born on US soil, they are a US citizen. Any change to that requires a Constitutional amendment. And the chances of that happening any time in the foreseeable future are less than zero.

EDIT: I just want to point out that requirements that at least one parent is a citizen and/or has established long term residency in the country is the standard in the UK, Austrailia, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Israel, Spain, and several other countries.

[–] kitonthenet@kbin.social 51 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ending birthright chitizenship is the quickest way to a starship troopers style citizen/non-citizen class divide you can concoct, which is ironically the specific situation the 14th amendment was written to avoid, because prior to that none of the enslaved people were citizens so all their descendants wouldn’t be either

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago

Exactly. Combine that with Native Americans and how we still have a problem with treating brown skinned folks like immigrants even when their family has been in a place since before it was America, especially in the portions of the country that once were Mexico. And we’ve also got the fact that we utilize long term labor from immigrants en masse.

There’s also the logical consistency thing. We’re the nation of immigrants. If you’re born here and raised here you’re one of us. I’d be willing to change it from birth to x time in childhood but that’s a lot of work for something I just don’t see as an issue. I think the way we’re making ourselves unappealing to immigrant labor is a much bigger problem in this country.

[–] anthoniix@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think the birthright citizenship is the way to go. If you're born in the US I think that should be the point where we go "Okay, you're a citizen". We could have a situation where a group of people are perpetually denied citizenship for some reason that's advantageous to another group, and that ensures their children can't becomes citizens either.

[–] kitonthenet@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We could have a situation where a group of people are perpetually denied citizenship for some reason that’s advantageous to another group, and that ensures their children can’t becomes citizens either

We did! It was slavery, slaves and their descendants were not citizens, and if it were not for birthright citizenship from the 14th amendment, would not be citizens today

[–] anthoniix@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Yeah :)

That's exactly what I was implying lol

[–] Steeve@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 year ago

This debate has been ongoing in Canada for a while now, but personally I'm going to hold off on forming an opinion until someone can actually prove it's an issue, because in Canada only ~500 births per year are from mothers who don't live in Canada. It's not even worth forming an opinion over, it's just another polarizing distraction. Not sure if it's as much of a non-issue in the US as well, but honestly it's not even worth thinking about until someone shares some actual data.

[–] its_prolly_fine@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or just deny travel visas to pregnant women, add in an investigation for people who aren't living in the US but have a baby here. If you are really worried about that, there are better ways than wholesale removal. It just doesn't really seem like a problem.

[–] a_statistician@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

deny travel visas to pregnant women

Right, cause that's a situation we really want to give CBP power over... pregnancy tests for all women at the border? Pregnant women who can't travel for business anymore? At that point, just make us 2nd class citizens and get it over with.

[–] SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

At that point, just make us 2nd class citizens and get it over with.

Oh don't worry, they're working on that already.

[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

I think the issue is maybe not all countries recognize children of their citizens as also being citizens if born in another country? I could be wrong though, all countries might recognize the children, I'm not that well versed in global citizenship rules.

If that were the case though, someone born in the US would technically not be a citizen anywhere if not for birthright.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 38 points 1 year ago

This is the same Republican party that vehemently defends the 2nd Amendment whose definition is much more widely "contested", despite having much more real and dire consequences than the 14th.

[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 29 points 1 year ago

He's such a little shi*. The Martin Shkreli of politicians. Though the GOP has a number of those.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 28 points 1 year ago

You know what else is contested? The second gd amendment.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 27 points 1 year ago

"Vote for me! I'm an asshole too!"

[–] Ghyste@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How about we deport this shitbag instead?

[–] GreenMario@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah no way he is a citizen. I WANT HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE

[–] Ghyste@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Gork@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

In triplicate.

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

Not that I don't think he actually believes in this bullshit but he's just saying whatever he can to get that easy money from the party of White Supremacy.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Imagine if the brown man promising to deport US citizens was a Democrat, how Republicans would react.

[–] seejur@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Depends. Are the us citizens browner?

[–] eran_morad@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

The republican party must be destroyed.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy said Friday he would deport the children of undocumented immigrants with their families, despite them already being U.S. citizens.

“There are legally contested questions under the 14th Amendment of whether the child of an illegal immigrant is indeed a child who enjoys birthright citizenship or not,” Ramaswamy said after a town hall in Iowa.

Former President Trump announced in late May that on his first day back in office, he would seek to end birthright citizenship by way of an executive order.

Despite the GOP candidates’ plans, a majority of Americans said the U.S. should continue to provide birthright citizenship in a poll following Trump’s announcement.

In his immigration plan, DeSantis’s campaign said citizenship rules as practiced now in the U.S. are “inconsistent with the original understanding of 14th Amendment.”

“We will take action to end the idea that the children of illegal aliens are entitled to birthright citizenship if they are born in the United States,” the plan, which is titled “No Excuses,” reads.


The original article contains 212 words, the summary contains 170 words. Saved 20%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Pratai@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

That dude is a presidential candidate like the 2008 Detroit Lions we’re Superbowl contenders.

[–] imPastaSyndrome@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Ah rhymes with fake is a real piece of shit

[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Maybe if immigrants started murdering rooms full of children they would defend the 14th amendment like they defend the second?