My ancestors were here as slaves from the beginning. Illegal is illegal. They can always apply to come here legally and if they are good enough candidates they will be accepted. Why would you want millions of subpar immigrants in the country?
here's a quote from Trumps grandfather when being deported from Bavaria: Why should we be deported? This is very, very hard for a family. What will our fellow citizens think if honest subjects are faced with such a decree - not to mention the great material losses it would incur. I would like to become a Bavarian citizen again.
We can always find an excuse to not set boundaries on anything. We mind as well have China or India's population. Hell let's just invite the whole world to live in the United States.
@@averagegamer1373 Read the constitution. They are not subject to there of, and they do not reside in the state just because they step a single foot onto US soil
To overturn United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) through reinterpretation of the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the 14th Amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court would need to adopt a significantly different interpretation of the Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. This would involve several legal and constitutional steps: Background: Wong Kim Ark Decision In Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court ruled that the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment grants U.S. citizenship to virtually all individuals born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents' nationality, as long as they are subject to U.S. jurisdiction. The Court interpreted "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to exclude only children of foreign diplomats, enemy combatants, or members of sovereign Native American tribes at the time. Reinterpreting "Under the Jurisdiction Thereof" To overturn this precedent, the Supreme Court would need to reinterpret the meaning of "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to exclude children of parents who are in the U.S. unlawfully. This would likely involve the following legal reasoning: 1. Reevaluation of Original Intent: The Court could revisit historical records from the drafting of the 14th Amendment to argue that its framers did not intend to grant citizenship to children of individuals in the U.S. illegally. Proponents of this view might cite debates from 1866 indicating that the jurisdiction clause was meant to exclude individuals with limited allegiance to the United States. 2. Allegiance Theory: The Court could argue that "jurisdiction" implies a level of allegiance to the U.S. government. Since undocumented immigrants have not formally consented to U.S. jurisdiction (e.g., through lawful admission or naturalization), their children would not qualify as citizens under the 14th Amendment. 3. Policy Implications and Modern Conditions: The Court might consider changing immigration dynamics and argue that extending citizenship to children of undocumented immigrants creates unintended policy consequences. This approach could stress the need to align constitutional interpretation with contemporary realities. 4. Distinguishing Wong Kim Ark: The Court might attempt to limit or distinguish Wong Kim Ark by arguing it applied only to the specific facts of that case-where the parents were lawfully domiciled in the U.S.-and does not extend to children of undocumented immigrants. They might frame the case as addressing a different legal question than modern birthright citizenship debates. Potential Challenges 1. Stare Decisis: Overruling Wong Kim Ark would require the Court to overturn a long-standing precedent. Stare decisis (respect for precedent) is a fundamental principle of judicial decision-making, and such a move would likely face substantial scrutiny. 2. Textual and Historical Analysis: Opponents of reinterpretation would argue that the broad and inclusive reading of the Citizenship Clause reflects both its plain language and historical context, which sought to ensure equal citizenship rights. 3. Practical and Legal Implications: A reinterpretation could create significant legal and social disruptions, such as the emergence of a new class of stateless individuals and challenges to existing notions of birthright citizenship. Legal Pathways Such a shift would likely require a case directly challenging the citizenship of an individual born in the U.S. to undocumented parents. The Supreme Court would then need to grant certiorari and use the case as a vehicle to revisit and reinterpret Wong Kim Ark. However, given the potential consequences and constitutional controversy, any decision would be contentious and have far-reaching implications for immigration law and civil rights.
Great demonstration on this constitutional issue. I have 2 questions to this issue. 1) the 14th and 15th amendment was initially put forth to bring the south back into the union after they broke away and lost the war? and 2) The 14th amendment was not intended but maybe extended to the formerly enslaved people made free, and if not would they still be considered stateless people?
What a long winded jabber. The US v. Wong decision did not include citizenship for US born children of trespassers. Wong’s parents were here legally when Wong was born in the US. This decision is right on point as to which US born children do and do not inherently inherit US birthright citizenship.
SCOTUS ruled it did not Appy to Indians and other children of non-citizens born here. we did not have legal or illegal immigration then, so we did not have illegal non-citizens. the obvious logical extension would be it does not include illegal non-citizens.
She's not explaining the financial impact very well. The federal funding that states receive is allocated by population. She's choosing to frame it around the medical support that the children born to undocumented parents receive when in fact that it's federal funds, period. Across the board. Money that supports our local infrastructure. The money for roads, transportation, and education of americans born to American parents will also be affected. The numbers of electors that we have to vote in the electoral college is also based on population. Removing those children from being counted has far reaching consequences. Regardess, no president has the power to change the constitution. A president does NOT have absolute power. We have the senate and the house for that reason.
@labgirl3501 0 seconds ago Trump is not changing the constitution, he is correcting an illegal misinterpretation of the constitution. The executive order was written specifically to force the issue into court so the Supreme Court can overturn the practice of birthright citizenship to illegals. A constitutional lawyer on Fox News explained that the pertinent requirement in the 14th amendment is that the parents be subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US in the same manner that children of diplomats born in the US are not citizens because the parents are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Illegals by the nature of their illegal status are not legally subject to the jurisdiction of the US. The Arizona attorney general is conveniently avoiding the real issue. This giving birthright citizenship to illegal children only came about in the last few decades. This will be clarified by the Supreme Court in Trump's favor particularly since the 14th amendment was intended to apply specifically to Black slaves after the civil war....not the latest Mexican to cross illegaly into the US in 2025.
A lot of pregnant women all over the world came to the US for this ridiculous law. People don't know how Mexicans using this law, they go back to Mexico and receive assistance from US, using their relative's address in US. I whole heartly support Trump on this.
Um, aren't most of his kids under the birthright citizenship law? Everyone, except Tiffany? So, will they be deported, along with his third wife and inlaws? Probably not, because the law or amendment is protected, supposedly?🤔 BTW, if he's successful with all his planned deportations, his people, who also wanted the deportations, will have plenty of jobs making less than minimum wage. You know, their dream jobs that no one else wanted. Go for it!
You're correct about that because if they do that, they have to include white people also because they are not Native Americans. That makes them illegal here as well.
@@johnnylafayette better be careful with people lumping black americans with other scenarios. That s what they do with every social experiment. Put black in so they can advance a cause even when detrimental to the country
@@smartman-kensington you do know why they are called native Americans and your ancestors were called colonizers??? Read up on history cuz obviously you don’t know it colonizer. You deserve to get your birth right taken away because your ancestors took land that wasn’t theirs smart one
That lady said we are fighting for the rights of the people but her reasons was all about people who have no rights here because they are illegal. That makes no sense lady
@@LoveYours091my dad did it with 9 children , and received welfare for only 3 months and now he has 38 grandchildren and 15 great grandchildren who was born here and did everything legally. So if my dad who was just a poor shoemaker in sovet union that made pennies did it. Anyone can do it. You just have to try all ways and honest ways and God will bless your journey. God bless America and our new President!
@@kathyweis7451 and that was 150 years ago and not dealing with the same thing as illegals using it. There is nothing wrong with it getting reviewed and updated.
@@billmiller2081 the 14th amendment was there largely for slaves immediately following the abolition 13th. It was never designed to be someone steps a single foot onto US soil and gets birth citizenship.
what does the statue of "liberty" have to do with this? is was to symbolize the release of slaves from bondage, hence the broken chains at her feet. it was never meant to have anything to do with immigration.
@AndrewBurbo-zw6pf you have no concept of liberty. The statye symbolizes the immigration changes to make them citizens and any others seeking america for freedom. So slow.
There are bigger issues than targeting people who are living just to get by. Instead of acting with empathy and understanding, he's approaching this as if all immigrants are criminals. He's making it out to be more of an agenda than providing an empathetic solution.
It was applied to slaves they were forced. It does not apply to the millions of illegal immigrants wanting to game the system. Thats how the courts should see it
@@TMGeewizzwon't matter Donald and his parrots will not uphold and protect the 14th Amendment of the Constitution since became into effect in 1866. Only rogue Felony president to ever proclaim his violation
As a conservative this fills me with such a despair and anger. I can understand why deporting a six month old baby who won't even remember America because a parent is illegal, but there are no guard rails here. A 30 year old who never spent a day on foreign soil could be deported because of the crime of one his parents. This reminds me of when liberals used to call White people living in America 'immigrants' or 'illegal immigrants' to justify their opened borders agenda, robbing us of our individuality and holding us accountable for the sins of our ancestors. Why stop at parents? Why not go back another generation. If one of your grandparents is illegal, shouldn't that make at least one of your parents illegal, which therefore makes you illegal? You could continue this ad infinitum.
Former President Donald Trump’s grandfather Friedrich unsuccessfully petitioned the government of Bavaria (now southeast Germany) not to deport him and his family.
No. That is not what anyone is saying. The 14th Amendment states that anyone born on USA soil they are considered an American. Why would they be deported to a country they never been to?
Not your name but since they were born on your property then they are legally entitled to remain on your property. This is the way the 14th Amendment has been misused.
How far back would it go? Would a 30yo no longer be a citizen? What about someone 50 years old who fought in Iraq but was born to immigrants? This is what I don’t understand.
No, simply having the "intent" to falsely claim citizenship does not automatically grant you citizenship, and if you deliberately attempt to defraud the law by falsely claiming citizenship, even with intent, you can still face legal repercussions, including potential deportation or barring from entering the country, regardless of your stated intentio. This also to me says with intent to frame law wiith intent to pregnancy to gain citizenship for child is against law. I have heard many stories of this being the case
Can someone tell me please what will happen to the children born in US and is a US citizenship but now living with parents in other countries ? Will he be still citizen and still avail all benefits?
last year, i watched my cousin go from feeling completely stuck in life to absolutely thriving. they’d been talking about a book called Vibrations of Manifestation by Alex Lane and how it wasn’t about “just think happy thoughts,” but more about getting real with yourself and your goals. at first, i didn’t pay much attention, but then they started landing dream opportunities, meeting new people, and just carrying themselves differently. it’s not some miracle story-they worked for it-but they said the book helped them focus in a way that made everything feel possible.
Trump and his dad was born in NY, making them citizens by birth. The 14t mentions one parents has to be here legally or a citizen. That what they are going to change, so that if both parents are here illegally they can't claim birth right citzenship.
Most other countries don't have birthright. Whatever country the parents are citizens of is the country that the child is a citizen of , not the country in which the child is born. If anything, this child should not become a burden to the state in which they were born. The parents need to be financially held liable.
It's not the constitutional right in the way that it's used now. You notice that the only people in favor of it are rich elites that have businesses which employ illegals. They should fine them to oblivion if caught employing an illegal.
@honeybeedaniels no it's not. the second clause in 14A clearly states "and subjects of jurisdiction thereof". you must meet both criteria to gain citizenship at birth, and illegals fail at this since they're subjects to foreign power, not USA
@@smartman-kensingtonLot of parrots repeating from a Rogue Felony wanna-be dictator. Who won't uphold protect the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States since 1866
The 14th amendment doesnt just say "Any person born in the United states is a citizen." It states "Any person born or naturalized AND subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the united states." Meaning that you also have to be subject to the law and rights that the US grants to you, to be a citizen. Illegal immigrants are not subject to that law, and thus neither are their children if they are born here. This section of the amendment is really meant to protect citizens against unlawful persecution, and keeping states or the federal government from making laws to abridge peoples citizenship that could wave their rights. Making sure that all current citizens are permitted equal rights under the jurisdiction of the United states. It was never meant to give random people being born in the country citizenship.
A constitutional lawyer explained that the pertinent requirement in the 14th amendment is that the parents be subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US in the same manner that children of diplomats born in the US are not citizens because the parents are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Illegals by the nature of their illegal status are not legally subject to the jurisdiction of the US. The Arizona attorney general is conveniently avoiding the real issue. This giving birthright citizenship to illegal children only came about in the last few decades. This will be clarified by the Supreme Court in Trump's favor particularly since the 14th amendment was intended to apply specifically to Black slaves after the civil war....not the latest Mexican to cross illegaly into the US in 2025.
Lot of brand new Internet Lawyers interpreting the law of the United States Constitution since 1866 of the 14th Amendment. Only a wanna be dictator and his parrots want to fit their narrative, ideology and discrimination against people of color. Only rogue Felony president since 1866 is not upholding and protecting the Constitution of the United States 14th Amendment
This lady is pitiful… 1. She intentionally skips the phrase in the 14th amendment that is being contested by Trump rather than refuting. 2. Anyone who read the actual EO knows it praises the reform in light of Dredd Scott 3. These kids are stateless. There are a small minority of counties (30) with birthright citizenship. Her argument infers immigrants born in the other 170 countries (all of EU) are all stateless. 4. She just claimed that immigrants’ kids are a burden on society. Great messaging for these kids… What an evil POS! However, if we accept her argument that they are a burden, why would we want them to be a burden for their entire life? You can’t deport citizens…
When hard working Americans can’t afford rent while those that come here illegally get free housing, food and a prepaid Visa card, there is something very wrong. Perhaps you are not affected where you live but take my word for it…..it’s happening.
for weeks, i kept seeing people rave about the book Vibrations of Manifestation by Alex Lane in the comments of different videos. it felt like every time i scrolled, someone was talking about how it changed their life. i finally gave in and read it, and honestly, i’m glad i did. it’s not just hype-it’s a practical guide to shifting your mindset and energy in a way that actually works. i’ve already noticed small changes in my life, and it’s making me rethink how i approach everything. now i get why so many people couldn’t stop talking about it.
Don't compare slaves to illegal immigrants coming to the USA. This is the problem with DEIJ and this comparison. Brown People ( Americans with African descent) always get the short end of the stick and their plight gets compared to people wanting benefits now.
Gross misinterpretation by this Attorney General. The amendment was never intended for illegal immigrants that sneak across the border to have anchor babies. This amendment was intended to apply to people in this country lawfully - slaves were not illegal immigrants. If the US allows a foreign national into the country then the amendment applies to any children they have here - if you sneak across and the govt has no record of your presence then no, the amendment should not apply. The amendment specifically says: "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." If the US has not acknowledged your legal presence in the country then you are effectually NOT subject to US jurisdiction.
Blacks here in America that are descendants of Africa are not anchor babies! 😡 We were forced here! Never forget that and dont put us in your generalizations!
Arizona should have thought about that before they voted for Trump. Too bad if it's unconstitutional. Trump was very clear that this was his plan. Can't fix stupid.
So , how about those baby’s born out of the country and they become citizens only because one of their parent is naturalized citizen.. I think that’s another issue.
The key word in the 14th amendment is "Subject to the Jurisdiction of.." which is what they might try to argue saying those parents are NOT Subjected to the Jurisdiction meaning (are not citizens or lawful permanent residents). Every word of this amendment matters in this case. So im afraid they might actually have an argument. I really hope they don't take away birthright citizenship.
i used to be skeptical about all this manifestation talk until one of my closest friends went from feeling stuck in their job to landing their dream role. it wasn’t just luck either-they’d been talking about a book called Vibrations of Manifestation by Alex Lane and how it shifted their mindset. what really got me was how they started approaching life differently-more calm, more focused-and things just started falling into place. they mentioned it wasn’t some overnight magic but a process of really understanding what they wanted and aligning with it. honestly, seeing the change in them made me curious about how much mindset matters.
When any Mother from another country has a baby in Canada that baby is not automatically a canadian until the age of 21. The adult has to pick to be canadian or not. Understanding the 14th Consitition any baby born in America is a citizen automatically. No choice. Birthright citizenship should be for babies who has an American mother that is a citizen. If not, have the same choice as a baby born in Canada at the age of 21 if mother is not canadian.
He is not overturning the constitution. It is a different interpretation of the constitution itself: “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” It has been interpreted as people born should withhold the law, but he is seeing it as people hold the law from birth - meaning the parents. Also. Not that hard, Germany and Japan do it already. Look it up. In Japan the child is not Japanese unless one of the parents is. If they are both foreigners, they have to go register their child at their home embassy and the child would then become a citizen of that foreign country. After all of that, they can ask for residency (through the parents) in Japan (according to the type of residency status the parents have) In Germany, you have to be a resident with a permanent resident card for 8 years prior to the birth of your child to claim citizenship at birth for the newborn. It is much more complicated and who knows what the US would seek to do. Nevertheless, there are many solutions to this.
It says all persons though. Last time I’ve checked all meant all. Plus the Supreme Court ruled on it before in 1898 in the case US v Wong Kim ark. The court said the 14th amendment grants citizenship to almost all children born on American soil to alien parents. The court said the only exceptions are children born to foreigners rulers or diplomats,born on foreign public ships and born to enemy forces engaged in hostile occupation.
@ the Supreme Court can overturn a previous decision, but it's rare. The Supreme Court generally respects precedent, but it can overrule a decision if there's a "special justification" We shall see what happens. For now, I am glad we are all learning more about our constitution thanks to this move. I am also thankful for checks and balances or else, this would all be a mess!
14th Amendment* 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.
Instead of this stupid diversion he could try something like, if you’re born here to parents in the country illegally you need to leave with deported parents but retain your citizenship. So they are citizens because the 14th amendment says they are (not being diplomats) but they aren’t a method to go around immigration laws.
Well, at this point I would say this is a strong indication that whether he has the strength or the power or not or how he feels or looks at it. This is who Trump is this is? What he's going to try to do and this is what people voted for this guy is very powerful. He is very strong. He does not take orders. And even though he has a sense of humor a personality and sometimes as well in the healthy bowl or be concerned for him, this is the kind of man that was voted for so, whether he can turn the Constitution or not, nobody can tell him differently so, whether you feel he can do this or not, this is the. Man people voted for. Congratulations live long and prosper. And that's the luck to the people that voted for this is what's gonna happen. You've seen a comment you knew was there and yet you did it anyway and this was one thing Harris was gonna go against, but you did it this way so. No. Body's got anybody to blame. But the people that spoke up and felt that he needed to be in the office because of how strong he was for the border, the economy. And now that's gonna happen, so it is what it is. It is what it is and that's been taken to the bank.
Not to mention not to mention the threat to all firstborn Americans. Their parents may not have been naturalized when they were born p,😊 but green carded now there's an essential can be taken away
i kept seeing people mention the book Vibrations of Manifestation by Alex Lane in the comments of so many videos. at first, i thought it was just overhyped, but after seeing it pop up everywhere, i decided to give it a shot. turns out, it really is as powerful as people say. the way it explains how to align your energy with what you truly want is something i’ve never seen before. it’s not just about thinking positively-it’s about actually understanding the process of manifesting your dream life. i can see why so many people are talking about it now.
most of them that work from juarez to el paso dont have work visa at at chicos tacos i have seen them work from juarez to el paso they pick them up at the border they take them to work at chicos tacos most of them that speak spanish dont have work visa.
Even fox, 43 in New York was for this President. Who knows how many other news Oregon? Today's Oregon news media was for this. President and social media definitely did not die down on it, so people that voted for well. You made your mark. You made your word. You said what you wanted and now this is what's happening and I'll say it once and I'll say it again.Congratulations
What are you paying for exactly? You pay billions of dollars to corporate subsidizing. That’s why they want dumb people like you to think immigrants are the enemy not the corporate welfare class
The 14th amendment has a provision in it, it states you must be under the jurisdiction of the US, translation if you’re not a US citizen guess what? Neither can your baby be go read it
jurisdiction noun ju·ris·dic·tion ˌju̇r-əs-ˈdik-shən Synonyms of jurisdiction 1 : the power, right, or authority to interpret and apply the law a matter that falls within the court's jurisdiction 2 a : the authority of a sovereign power to govern or legislate b : the power or right to exercise authority : CONTROL As long as you are on US soil you’re under its jurisdiction the only exception are diplomats …please go back to school!
He cannot overturn the constitution or its amendments. He does not have that power as part of the executive branch.
Birthright citizenship isn't in the Constitution.
@@KB-ut6xj well thank God, the 14th amendment was written for the freed slaves and not criminal aliens
Read the 14th Amendment!@@superoldgamesaturday3277
@@superoldgamesaturday3277The 14th amendment is in the Constitution, genius.
Constitution says they cannot come over here illegally
What ever happened to that Sherriff in TExas who was helping the cartel bring in fentanyl why don't we ever hear the ending of that story
He’s probably in tЯump’s administration. Gotta keep Elon supplied.
That guy needs a dose of the junk he help distribute. That garbage is and has taken so many aspiring youths destroyed families.
Because there's more to that, much much more deeper and higher up the ranks.
Great if born in the USA by parents who legally entered the USA, not by parents who illegally entered the USA
I totally agree!
Like MELANIA!!👈🤤
Y'all need to READ the constitution.
You need to educate yourself because you are wrong..
Melania met el trumpo at the Kitkat club. She had the Einstein visa. 😐
It’s all about the money. Basically she said it herself….
You can't ignore the Constitution.
That's right. It's not a right in the constitution for illegal immigrant children born here to automatically become citizens.
Supreme court will uphold it. You're here illegally, you're not covered under the 14th. It very clearly states that in the text.
14th Amendment applies to formerly enslaved black people and their descendants!
@@ashburnconnecttv7860it’s been upheld in a case involving a Chinese baby.
They are not subject to the jurisdiction thereof by having on foot on US soil. And they don't reside in that state by stepping afoot onto US soil.
Although I see the logic, it’s still pretty hypocritical seeing how most of us are only 3 or 4 generations deep.
My ancestors were here as slaves from the beginning. Illegal is illegal. They can always apply to come here legally and if they are good enough candidates they will be accepted. Why would you want millions of subpar immigrants in the country?
here's a quote from Trumps grandfather when being deported from Bavaria: Why should we be deported? This is very, very hard for a family. What will our fellow citizens think if honest subjects are faced with such a decree - not to mention the great material losses it would incur. I would like to become a Bavarian citizen again.
We can always find an excuse to not set boundaries on anything. We mind as well have China or India's population. Hell let's just invite the whole world to live in the United States.
Yet we had ancestors who for the most part came here legally. No hypocritical stuff there.
Exactly most of the country could be stripped of their citizenship if they violate the constitution!
Give back the statue of liberty. We do not deserve it.
Supreme court will uphold it. You're here illegally, you're not covered under the 14th. It very clearly states that in the text.
They are not subject to the jurisdiction thereof by having on foot on US soil. And they don't reside in that state by stepping afoot onto US soil.
So because we have the Statue of Liberty, we should be the world’s sucker ,kick rocks buddy.
@@The8Donbut if you are born here, you are. That’s what “birthright citizenship” means.
@@averagegamer1373 Read the constitution. They are not subject to there of, and they do not reside in the state just because they step a single foot onto US soil
To overturn United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) through reinterpretation of the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the 14th Amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court would need to adopt a significantly different interpretation of the Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. This would involve several legal and constitutional steps:
Background: Wong Kim Ark Decision
In Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court ruled that the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment grants U.S. citizenship to virtually all individuals born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents' nationality, as long as they are subject to U.S. jurisdiction. The Court interpreted "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to exclude only children of foreign diplomats, enemy combatants, or members of sovereign Native American tribes at the time.
Reinterpreting "Under the Jurisdiction Thereof"
To overturn this precedent, the Supreme Court would need to reinterpret the meaning of "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to exclude children of parents who are in the U.S. unlawfully. This would likely involve the following legal reasoning:
1. Reevaluation of Original Intent:
The Court could revisit historical records from the drafting of the 14th Amendment to argue that its framers did not intend to grant citizenship to children of individuals in the U.S. illegally. Proponents of this view might cite debates from 1866 indicating that the jurisdiction clause was meant to exclude individuals with limited allegiance to the United States.
2. Allegiance Theory:
The Court could argue that "jurisdiction" implies a level of allegiance to the U.S. government. Since undocumented immigrants have not formally consented to U.S. jurisdiction (e.g., through lawful admission or naturalization), their children would not qualify as citizens under the 14th Amendment.
3. Policy Implications and Modern Conditions:
The Court might consider changing immigration dynamics and argue that extending citizenship to children of undocumented immigrants creates unintended policy consequences. This approach could stress the need to align constitutional interpretation with contemporary realities.
4. Distinguishing Wong Kim Ark:
The Court might attempt to limit or distinguish Wong Kim Ark by arguing it applied only to the specific facts of that case-where the parents were lawfully domiciled in the U.S.-and does not extend to children of undocumented immigrants. They might frame the case as addressing a different legal question than modern birthright citizenship debates.
Potential Challenges
1. Stare Decisis:
Overruling Wong Kim Ark would require the Court to overturn a long-standing precedent. Stare decisis (respect for precedent) is a fundamental principle of judicial decision-making, and such a move would likely face substantial scrutiny.
2. Textual and Historical Analysis:
Opponents of reinterpretation would argue that the broad and inclusive reading of the Citizenship Clause reflects both its plain language and historical context, which sought to ensure equal citizenship rights.
3. Practical and Legal Implications:
A reinterpretation could create significant legal and social disruptions, such as the emergence of a new class of stateless individuals and challenges to existing notions of birthright citizenship.
Legal Pathways
Such a shift would likely require a case directly challenging the citizenship of an individual born in the U.S. to undocumented parents. The Supreme Court would then need to grant certiorari and use the case as a vehicle to revisit and reinterpret Wong Kim Ark. However, given the potential consequences and constitutional controversy, any decision would be contentious and have far-reaching implications for immigration law and civil rights.
Great demonstration on this constitutional issue. I have 2 questions to this issue. 1) the 14th and 15th amendment was initially put forth to bring the south back into the union after they broke away and lost the war? and 2) The 14th amendment was not intended but maybe extended to the formerly enslaved people made free, and if not would they still be considered stateless people?
What a long winded jabber. The US v. Wong decision did not include citizenship for US born children of trespassers. Wong’s parents were here legally when Wong was born in the US. This decision is right on point as to which US born children do and do not inherently inherit US birthright citizenship.
SCOTUS ruled it did not Appy to Indians and other children of non-citizens born here. we did not have legal or illegal immigration then, so we did not have illegal non-citizens. the obvious logical extension would be it does not include illegal non-citizens.
@@moslem1928 slaves, as property, were subject to the jurisdiction of the state.
She's not explaining the financial impact very well. The federal funding that states receive is allocated by population. She's choosing to frame it around the medical support that the children born to undocumented parents receive when in fact that it's federal funds, period. Across the board. Money that supports our local infrastructure. The money for roads, transportation, and education of americans born to American parents will also be affected. The numbers of electors that we have to vote in the electoral college is also based on population. Removing those children from being counted has far reaching consequences. Regardess, no president has the power to change the constitution. A president does NOT have absolute power. We have the senate and the house for that reason.
Unfortunately this dictator does have full authority because he doesn’t abide by laws and Congress won’t stop him.
@labgirl3501
0 seconds ago
Trump is not changing the constitution, he is correcting an illegal misinterpretation of the constitution. The executive order was written specifically to force the issue into court so the Supreme Court can overturn the practice of birthright citizenship to illegals. A constitutional lawyer on Fox News explained that the pertinent requirement in the 14th amendment is that the parents be subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US in the same manner that children of diplomats born in the US are not citizens because the parents are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Illegals by the nature of their illegal status are not legally subject to the jurisdiction of the US. The Arizona attorney general is conveniently avoiding the real issue. This giving birthright citizenship to illegal children only came about in the last few decades. This will be clarified by the Supreme Court in Trump's favor particularly since the 14th amendment was intended to apply specifically to Black slaves after the civil war....not the latest Mexican to cross illegaly into the US in 2025.
Good thing we have control over all three 😂
Read the Constitution there is a reason why it said all people born of the United born of the United States
Biden did
A lot of pregnant women all over the world came to the US for this ridiculous law. People don't know how Mexicans using this law, they go back to Mexico and receive assistance from US, using their relative's address in US. I whole heartly support Trump on this.
Wtf?? Damn
That is BS.
@xyz-f2q8mWhats your point ?
@xyz-f2q8mThey don't do it for free !
@@cheryldebejare3570 no its not, I live at the border it happens all the time
Um, aren't most of his kids under the birthright citizenship law? Everyone, except Tiffany? So, will they be deported, along with his third wife and inlaws? Probably not, because the law or amendment is protected, supposedly?🤔
BTW, if he's successful with all his planned deportations, his people, who also wanted the deportations, will have plenty of jobs making less than minimum wage. You know, their dream jobs that no one else wanted. Go for it!
Exactly what about his kids citizenship? Their mothers are immigrants!
@@LiveByDesign their father is a citizen, and their mothers immigrated legally
Don’t lump black people in this mess
You're correct about that because if they do that, they have to include white people also because they are not Native Americans. That makes them illegal here as well.
Dude. That's exactly what it's alllll about. . Heritage foundation isn't new. It's the same families who made billions off slavery
Amen lol
@@johnnylafayette better be careful with people lumping black americans with other scenarios. That s what they do with every social experiment. Put black in so they can advance a cause even when detrimental to the country
They already are.
He keeps winning and you keep losing
Everything that goes up must come down.
Unfortunately, you are right, but I refuse to give in. 👎
@@danielfegley2735 you can refuse but that won’t matter.
If you come here illegally why do they get a privilege
So we just gonna forget your ancestors taking this land illegally from the natives?
then go through congress and amend the 14th amendment. stop being lazy
@@noelopez6347 natives conquered others to get the land. conqueror got conquered, sounds like fair game
@xyz-f2q8m victory in war. that's where we got the right. just like how the natives got the land from each other
@@smartman-kensington you do know why they are called native Americans and your ancestors were called colonizers??? Read up on history cuz obviously you don’t know it colonizer. You deserve to get your birth right taken away because your ancestors took land that wasn’t theirs smart one
Reading several comments, feels like a new wave of hate and supremacy is the air
That lady said we are fighting for the rights of the people but her reasons was all about people who have no rights here because they are illegal. That makes no sense lady
A president does not have absolute power. Period. That is why we have the house and senate.
I read this comment before.
Come into America legal. Easy As Pie!!!!! Or get legal or leave! Don't put yourself or your children in danger.
It’s not easy as pie
@@LoveYours091 nothing worth having is.
You have the brain capacity of a gnat.
@@LoveYours091my dad did it with 9 children , and received welfare for only 3 months and now he has 38 grandchildren and 15 great grandchildren who was born here and did everything legally. So if my dad who was just a poor shoemaker in sovet union that made pennies did it. Anyone can do it. You just have to try all ways and honest ways and God will bless your journey.
God bless America and our new President!
If Arizona wants to leave the union for immigrants, please exit stage left.
What about california and new york 😂 MA3WA make america 3rd world again 😅
Lol at this pace they will only have the non performing states lol
usa is all immigrnt natn by definition all are immigrnt children so cut ur bs
You foolishly think the federal government would allow a state to leave the union.
hey so you know that these states are the only ones that actually matter right - if the south and most red states were gone no one would notice.
Supreme court will uphold it. You're here illegally, you're not covered under the 14th. It very clearly states that in the text.
Did you not listen? Birth right has been upheld by the Supreme Court for 150 years.
@ They are not subject to the jurisdiction thereof by having on foot on US soil. And they don't reside in that state by stepping afoot onto US soil.
@@kathyweis7451 and that was 150 years ago and not dealing with the same thing as illegals using it. There is nothing wrong with it getting reviewed and updated.
It has never been tested in the court look what happened to Row. They will end it
@@billmiller2081 the 14th amendment was there largely for slaves immediately following the abolition 13th. It was never designed to be someone steps a single foot onto US soil and gets birth citizenship.
Almost all other counties (Europe amd Asia) does not have birthright. Wonder why?
Because they are not country of immigrants the way United States is!!!
Right. And most of the countries that do offer it are 3rd world countries
Because the people who live there came from there america is part of the new world 😅 most of the people here moved here within the last 100 years
Wow, you are seriously dumb AF. 😂😂😂 Gotta love how MAGAts can’t make a simple fact check.
I wonder what their gun and speech laws are like...
Ultimately, it's the children who will suffer the most! 😥
Cruelties will abound when you have a person who is corrupt in power .
Absolutely! Thank God Biden is out of there!!
Trump❤❤. He does always the right movement.
Do your due diligence and go read the executive yourself. It says children born in the US whose mom and dad are in the US illegally.
The Statue of Liberty is now just some really tall lady. A giant lawn gnome.
what does the statue of "liberty" have to do with this? is was to symbolize the release of slaves from bondage, hence the broken chains at her feet. it was never meant to have anything to do with immigration.
@@AndrewBurbo-zw6pf Slaves couldn't be citizens until Amendment 14.
@@AndrewBurbo-zw6pf Most slaves were not allowed to be citizens in USA. Especially those of African decent. Liberty gave them that right.
@@hls1492 exactly, liberty, not immigration status
@AndrewBurbo-zw6pf you have no concept of liberty. The statye symbolizes the immigration changes to make them citizens and any others seeking america for freedom. So slow.
There are bigger issues than targeting people who are living just to get by.
Instead of acting with empathy and understanding, he's approaching this as if all immigrants are criminals. He's making it out to be more of an agenda than providing an empathetic solution.
😂😂😂😂 If illegals have constitutional rights ? Wouldn’t they be citizens 🤣🤣🤣🤣
It was applied to slaves they were forced. It does not apply to the millions of illegal immigrants wanting to game the system. Thats how the courts should see it
Most countries do not allow birthright citizenship. Why do we?
The ACLU also filed a lawsuit. The exact reason I rejoined the ACLU. I have a relative this impacts.
your relative must be deported. 14A specifically mention "subject of jurisdiction thereof" to be eligible for citizenship at birth
Yet the didn’t care about censorship during Biden
A democrat talking about closing the border this party is toast
Illegal entrance means you have NO RIGHTS @ ALL GET OUT
Melanie was not citizen yet when gave birth to baron 😅😅
Wouldn’t matter because his father is a US citizen.
@@TMGeewizzwon't matter Donald and his parrots will not uphold and protect the 14th Amendment of the Constitution since became into effect in 1866. Only rogue Felony president to ever proclaim his violation
If he somehow be allowed to overturn the rules. What are the next rules he breaks?
The rules about giving people the right to vote? Or?
As a conservative this fills me with such a despair and anger. I can understand why deporting a six month old baby who won't even remember America because a parent is illegal, but there are no guard rails here. A 30 year old who never spent a day on foreign soil could be deported because of the crime of one his parents. This reminds me of when liberals used to call White people living in America 'immigrants' or 'illegal immigrants' to justify their opened borders agenda, robbing us of our individuality and holding us accountable for the sins of our ancestors.
Why stop at parents? Why not go back another generation. If one of your grandparents is illegal, shouldn't that make at least one of your parents illegal, which therefore makes you illegal? You could continue this ad infinitum.
Good for Trump and the US
Former President Donald Trump’s grandfather Friedrich unsuccessfully petitioned the government of Bavaria (now southeast Germany) not to deport him and his family.
so?
So if someone is born on my property I have to give that person my family name?
No. That is not what anyone is saying. The 14th Amendment states that anyone born on USA soil they are considered an American. Why would they be deported to a country they never been to?
Not your name but since they were born on your property then they are legally entitled to remain on your property. This is the way the 14th Amendment has been misused.
Does the US constitution say that?
How far back would it go? Would a 30yo no longer be a citizen? What about someone 50 years old who fought in Iraq but was born to immigrants? This is what I don’t understand.
No, simply having the "intent" to falsely claim citizenship does not automatically grant you citizenship, and if you deliberately attempt to defraud the law by falsely claiming citizenship, even with intent, you can still face legal repercussions, including potential deportation or barring from entering the country, regardless of your stated intentio. This also to me says with intent to frame law wiith intent to pregnancy to gain citizenship for child is against law. I have heard many stories of this being the case
Can someone tell me please what will happen to the children born in US and is a US citizenship but now living with parents in other countries ? Will he be still citizen and still avail all benefits?
last year, i watched my cousin go from feeling completely stuck in life to absolutely thriving. they’d been talking about a book called Vibrations of Manifestation by Alex Lane and how it wasn’t about “just think happy thoughts,” but more about getting real with yourself and your goals. at first, i didn’t pay much attention, but then they started landing dream opportunities, meeting new people, and just carrying themselves differently. it’s not some miracle story-they worked for it-but they said the book helped them focus in a way that made everything feel possible.
if the supreme court sides with trump and ignores the 14th Amendment , at that point just disband congress
His kids and grandkids are on this list of immigrants right?
Trump and his dad was born in NY, making them citizens by birth. The 14t mentions one parents has to be here legally or a citizen. That what they are going to change, so that if both parents are here illegally they can't claim birth right citzenship.
No. President Trump is a US citizen so even if his wives were illegal then the offspring would inherit his US citizenship.
Pointless chaos... again.
The absolute answer is because he is the most absolute naked in the open racist president this nation has ever elected!
Your party keeps redefining words.
Salty tears
This is the most baseless comment ever made. You got proof of this "racism"? If not then stfu idiot.
Nah bro, he's not racist, that's just your unhinged parties talking points
How is cutting birthright citizenship racist my guy😂
The federal Government is not the father. Why should they pay?
Democrats are Crying.Ask the People what they Want.
By people are you referring to just maga or all people? They don’t want the same thing.
Do you think this reporter will work at ABCNEWS tomorrow ???
Just go home apply legally
Unless you are indigineous Native American then you should start packing your bags....
Do you know what birthright means?
This rule includes children born to people here legally
The majority of the American people voted 🗳 president DonaldJTrump in to office, the minority are crying 😂😂😂😂
Most other countries don't have birthright. Whatever country the parents are citizens of is the country that the child is a citizen of , not the country in which the child is born. If anything, this child should not become a burden to the state in which they were born. The parents need to be financially held liable.
We aren't most countries. Birthright citizenship is our constitutional right.
Most don't have freedom of speech or 2nd amendment. That's why we're AMERICA 🇺🇸
It's not the constitutional right in the way that it's used now. You notice that the only people in favor of it are rich elites that have businesses which employ illegals. They should fine them to oblivion if caught employing an illegal.
@honeybeedaniels no it's not. the second clause in 14A clearly states "and subjects of jurisdiction thereof". you must meet both criteria to gain citizenship at birth, and illegals fail at this since they're subjects to foreign power, not USA
@@smartman-kensingtonLot of parrots repeating from a Rogue Felony wanna-be dictator. Who won't uphold protect the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States since 1866
The 14th amendment doesnt just say "Any person born in the United states is a citizen."
It states "Any person born or naturalized AND subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the united states." Meaning that you also have to be subject to the law and rights that the US grants to you, to be a citizen. Illegal immigrants are not subject to that law, and thus neither are their children if they are born here.
This section of the amendment is really meant to protect citizens against unlawful persecution, and keeping states or the federal government from making laws to abridge peoples citizenship that could wave their rights. Making sure that all current citizens are permitted equal rights under the jurisdiction of the United states.
It was never meant to give random people being born in the country citizenship.
Just here to read all the constitutional armchair expert comments 🍿🙃
Simple. born here? Legal. Parents illegal? Deported. Dont wanna separate families? Maybe think about that first before coming here illegally!
A constitutional lawyer explained that the pertinent requirement in the 14th amendment is that the parents be subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US in the same manner that children of diplomats born in the US are not citizens because the parents are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Illegals by the nature of their illegal status are not legally subject to the jurisdiction of the US. The Arizona attorney general is conveniently avoiding the real issue. This giving birthright citizenship to illegal children only came about in the last few decades. This will be clarified by the Supreme Court in Trump's favor particularly since the 14th amendment was intended to apply specifically to Black slaves after the civil war....not the latest Mexican to cross illegaly into the US in 2025.
Look up the definition of jurisdiction before opening your uneducated mouth!
Yes, the supreme court will clarify this. There is a lot of confusion but the 14th is the 14th and must be interpreted correctly.
No lawyer said that. The jx part only applies to diplomats and their children because they have diplomatic immunity from the laws of the US.
Lot of brand new Internet Lawyers interpreting the law of the United States Constitution since 1866 of the 14th Amendment. Only a wanna be dictator and his parrots want to fit their narrative, ideology and discrimination against people of color.
Only rogue Felony president since 1866 is not upholding and protecting the Constitution of the United States 14th Amendment
The problem is he has nothing but time and many constituents to help enforce this time around.
This lady is pitiful…
1. She intentionally skips the phrase in the 14th amendment that is being contested by Trump rather than refuting.
2. Anyone who read the actual EO knows it praises the reform in light of Dredd Scott
3. These kids are stateless. There are a small minority of counties (30) with birthright citizenship. Her argument infers immigrants born in the other 170 countries (all of EU) are all stateless.
4. She just claimed that immigrants’ kids are a burden on society. Great messaging for these kids… What an evil POS!
However, if we accept her argument that they are a burden, why would we want them to be a burden for their entire life? You can’t deport citizens…
You are the one who intentionally ignores the 14th amendment. She read the 14th amendment to the interview.
What ever happened to "We are a nation of liberty and justice for all?" The republican party has become a bunch of cowards. A total disgrace.
So you would like for an illegal immigrant to have a child born in the USA to become a President? wtf is wrong with you?
Cry more 😭
we only have liberty and justice for all when all our laws are enforced
exactly because of that we're repelling illegals aka law breakers...
When hard working Americans can’t afford rent while those that come here illegally get free housing, food and a prepaid Visa card, there is something very wrong. Perhaps you are not affected where you live but take my word for it…..it’s happening.
for weeks, i kept seeing people rave about the book Vibrations of Manifestation by Alex Lane in the comments of different videos. it felt like every time i scrolled, someone was talking about how it changed their life. i finally gave in and read it, and honestly, i’m glad i did. it’s not just hype-it’s a practical guide to shifting your mindset and energy in a way that actually works. i’ve already noticed small changes in my life, and it’s making me rethink how i approach everything. now i get why so many people couldn’t stop talking about it.
Don't compare slaves to illegal immigrants coming to the USA. This is the problem with DEIJ and this comparison. Brown People ( Americans with African descent) always get the short end of the stick and their plight gets compared to people wanting benefits now.
They need to go back and research the case USA vs Wong Kim Ark, 1957. This case literally diverted the 14th Amendment.
Only rogue Felony president won't uphold protect the Constitution
Gross misinterpretation by this Attorney General. The amendment was never intended for illegal immigrants that sneak across the border to have anchor babies. This amendment was intended to apply to people in this country lawfully - slaves were not illegal immigrants. If the US allows a foreign national into the country then the amendment applies to any children they have here - if you sneak across and the govt has no record of your presence then no, the amendment should not apply. The amendment specifically says: "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." If the US has not acknowledged your legal presence in the country then you are effectually NOT subject to US jurisdiction.
WTF💯💯💯
You know someone years ago gave me the anchor baby argument. Rape doesn't make an anchor baby.
Everyone in a america is a anchor baby lmao ... unless your native american your a anchor baby
Who was here before the natives? Duhhhh
Blacks here in America that are descendants of Africa are not anchor babies! 😡 We were forced here! Never forget that and dont put us in your generalizations!
Well said!
wrong. if your parents are illegal aliens you do not deserve any rights in this country.
Thats not how it works.
Arizona should have thought about that before they voted for Trump. Too bad if it's unconstitutional. Trump was very clear that this was his plan. Can't fix stupid.
The law was created for the descendants of those formerly enslaved Black Americans.
This affects legal immigrants as well who are in the country for years waiting on their green card applications. like Kamala Harris's mom.
It's a different in being legal or illegal , that's the whole problem
FFS, if you are born here your legal.
@@kathyweis7451 wrong.
Legal and undocumented immigrants have proven to commit less crime than natural born Americans. Stop with the xenophobic nonsense
So , how about those baby’s born out of the country and they become citizens only because one of their parent is naturalized citizen.. I think that’s another issue.
@@kathyweis7451 only if you are "Subject to the jurisdiction thereof" that means anyone legally doing business in a state or country.
The key word in the 14th amendment is "Subject to the Jurisdiction of.." which is what they might try to argue saying those parents are NOT Subjected to the Jurisdiction meaning (are not citizens or lawful permanent residents). Every word of this amendment matters in this case. So im afraid they might actually have an argument. I really hope they don't take away birthright citizenship.
i used to be skeptical about all this manifestation talk until one of my closest friends went from feeling stuck in their job to landing their dream role. it wasn’t just luck either-they’d been talking about a book called Vibrations of Manifestation by Alex Lane and how it shifted their mindset. what really got me was how they started approaching life differently-more calm, more focused-and things just started falling into place. they mentioned it wasn’t some overnight magic but a process of really understanding what they wanted and aligning with it. honestly, seeing the change in them made me curious about how much mindset matters.
one thing is deporting another is keeping newborns in the limbo. not all countries of parents origin will recognize newborns as citizens.
When any Mother from another country has a baby in Canada that baby is not automatically a canadian until the age of 21. The adult has to pick to be canadian or not. Understanding the 14th Consitition any baby born in America is a citizen automatically. No choice. Birthright citizenship should be for babies who has an American mother that is a citizen. If not, have the same choice as a baby born in Canada at the age of 21 if mother is not canadian.
He is not overturning the constitution. It is a different interpretation of the constitution itself:
“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”
It has been interpreted as people born should withhold the law, but he is seeing it as people hold the law from birth - meaning the parents.
Also. Not that hard, Germany and Japan do it already. Look it up. In Japan the child is not Japanese unless one of the parents is. If they are both foreigners, they have to go register their child at their home embassy and the child would then become a citizen of that foreign country. After all of that, they can ask for residency (through the parents) in Japan (according to the type of residency status the parents have)
In Germany, you have to be a resident with a permanent resident card for 8 years prior to the birth of your child to claim citizenship at birth for the newborn. It is much more complicated and who knows what the US would seek to do.
Nevertheless, there are many solutions to this.
It says all persons though. Last time I’ve checked all meant all. Plus the Supreme Court ruled on it before in 1898 in the case US v Wong Kim ark.
The court said the 14th amendment grants citizenship to almost all children born on American soil to alien parents. The court said the only exceptions are children born to foreigners rulers or diplomats,born on foreign public ships and born to enemy forces engaged in hostile occupation.
@ the Supreme Court can overturn a previous decision, but it's rare. The Supreme Court generally respects precedent, but it can overrule a decision if there's a "special justification"
We shall see what happens. For now, I am glad we are all learning more about our constitution thanks to this move. I am also thankful for checks and balances or else, this would all be a mess!
This will get bad,very fast.
14th Amendment*
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.
Instead of this stupid diversion he could try something like, if you’re born here to parents in the country illegally you need to leave with deported parents but retain your citizenship. So they are citizens because the 14th amendment says they are (not being diplomats) but they aren’t a method to go around immigration laws.
Well, at this point I would say this is a strong indication that whether he has the strength or the power or not or how he feels or looks at it. This is who Trump is this is? What he's going to try to do and this is what people voted for this guy is very powerful. He is very strong. He does not take orders. And even though he has a sense of humor a personality and sometimes as well in the healthy bowl or be concerned for him, this is the kind of man that was voted for so, whether he can turn the Constitution or not, nobody can tell him differently so, whether you feel he can do this or not, this is the. Man people voted for. Congratulations live long and prosper. And that's the luck to the people that voted for this is what's gonna happen. You've seen a comment you knew was there and yet you did it anyway and this was one thing Harris was gonna go against, but you did it this way so. No.
Body's got anybody to blame. But the people that spoke up and felt that he needed to be in the office because of how strong he was for the border, the economy. And now that's gonna happen, so it is what it is. It is what it is and that's been taken to the bank.
This is about Obama. Donald is that spiteful 😂
Since the 14th Amendment was instituted to protect slaves, why does it still exist? I can't wait to read the Supreme Court"s ruling on this.
That’s the point of the constitution to prevent racists like you from subverting the spirit of freedom and democracy!
Not to mention not to mention the threat to all firstborn Americans. Their parents may not have been naturalized when they were born p,😊 but green carded now there's an essential can be taken away
Only citizens can have children as citizens actually read it
Make Fani Willis a show piece. She is from Africa and is undocumented.
The power belongs to the state.
😂😂😂 like that girl said she says he can’t he just did😂😂😂
Has nothing to do with constitution
Daamm dope was cheaper when trump was in office last time dont ask me how i know this.
i kept seeing people mention the book Vibrations of Manifestation by Alex Lane in the comments of so many videos. at first, i thought it was just overhyped, but after seeing it pop up everywhere, i decided to give it a shot. turns out, it really is as powerful as people say. the way it explains how to align your energy with what you truly want is something i’ve never seen before. it’s not just about thinking positively-it’s about actually understanding the process of manifesting your dream life. i can see why so many people are talking about it now.
Exactly.
most of them that work from juarez to el paso dont have work visa at at chicos tacos i have seen them work from juarez to el paso they pick them up at the border they take them to work at chicos tacos most of them that speak spanish dont have work visa.
Trump: Ooh that's a big one.
Amen!
This is what I hear this AZ Ag saying - We only want these "migrants" here if we get federal funding, but not, if we have to use our state funding. 🤔😆
Even fox, 43 in New York was for this President. Who knows how many other news Oregon? Today's Oregon news media was for this. President and social media definitely did not die down on it, so people that voted for well. You made your mark. You made your word. You said what you wanted and now this is what's happening and I'll say it once and I'll say it again.Congratulations
We taxpayers prefer not to pay for these illegal people, thank you for telling us the truth
What are you paying for exactly? You pay billions of dollars to corporate subsidizing. That’s why they want dumb people like you to think immigrants are the enemy not the corporate welfare class
The USA is the ONLY country in the World to have this provision!!! Time the USA got with the program & joined everyone else!!
What happens to those who fall into this category but join the armed forces and serve. Does this mean they get booted out? Not nice.
Let them CHALLENGE all they want. No compliance, No Federal funding. Capiche ?
you should be deported first
It’s not all of a sudden it’s years an damage of lies from folks illegally here
The 14th amendment has a provision in it, it states you must be under the jurisdiction of the US, translation if you’re not a US citizen guess what? Neither can your baby be go read it
jurisdiction
noun
ju·ris·dic·tion ˌju̇r-əs-ˈdik-shən
Synonyms of jurisdiction
1
: the power, right, or authority to interpret and apply the law
a matter that falls within the court's jurisdiction
2
a
: the authority of a sovereign power to govern or legislate
b
: the power or right to exercise authority : CONTROL
As long as you are on US soil you’re under its jurisdiction the only exception are diplomats …please go back to school!