• UncleGrandPa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    He is much closer to his stated goal

    The power to deport any natural Born Citizen on demand for no reason at all

    He has stated he wants… Needs this

    On Exactly why he has been vague

    • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 hour ago

      That means him first motherfucker because Trump is a birthright citizen. His grandfather was an immigrant.

      Not like me is like 12 generations removed but still immigrant. Except on my mother’s side that native American. But guess Trump will deport them too, because if you got technical they also are immigrants.

  • SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    Wait … Doesn’t “citizenship” mean where you’re born?

    It’s either where you’re born or where you live. Which is it?

    Wtf even is citizenship then?

    “I’m from Ireland” is synonymous with “I’m Irish”… Right?

    So if you’re born in America, wouldn’t you… Be American?

    If he takes that away, you aren’t just magically from nowhere, you’re still American.

    This is stupid and makes no sense, it’s all just classism and racism. I hate everything.

    • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      Doesn’t “citizenship” mean where you’re born?

      Only in the new world continents. In Africa, Europe, and Asia it normally means what country your parents and grandparents are from, unless someone in the chain naturalises to a different country.

    • ToastedRavioli@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      63
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      Its the same as the election between Obama and McCain, in ways a lot of people dont realize.

      Obama, by virtue of having a non-traditional name and not being white, was hounded by birthers despite being born an American citizen clear as day with absolutely no question about it.

      McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone the year before people born in the canal zone were granted citizenship at birth. Arguably he was not a citizen at birth under the definitional requirements of the constitution to be president. He was naturalized as a citizen retroactively.

      Palin is part native, and was pretty heavily involved with Alaska Native movements that rejected US sovereignty and thereby rejected claims to citizenship. But no one talked about that either because shes also largely seen as just being a white American.

      And yet Obama, who was American thru and thru from birth without question, never was involved with Hawaiian sovereignty movements, is the one whos citizenship was questioned.

      “White makes right” is the rule of law to these people

    • Hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Most people are citizens of where they also live and give birth so this distinction doesn’t come up in most cases. But for children born to immigrants or travelers it does.

      Citizenship can either be assigned by where you were born, or who you were born to.

      Birthright citizenship, as we use the term in the US, is mostly a new world invention. In nearly all countries in the americas, any children born here are citizens without exception. No matter the parents, no matter the circumstances.

      In the old world, most countries require a parent to be a citizen in order for the child to also be a citizen.

      Generally if an american couple gives birth in Europe, the child will just be american, despite where they were born. If a European couple gives birth in any of the americas, their child will be a citizen of the americas, despite anything else

    • dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      You operate under the assumption that this is a public service. That would make no sense.

      But if the assumption is them accumulating more power, then it makes perfect sense.

      To be honest I get more mad at people being surprised by their actions. At this point it is so obvious what is happening and why. How can anyone be surprised by any of this?

      “Why does this rabid dog bites? How does this make for a better world?”

      It is a rabid dog, how could you ever expect something positive to begin with? Put it down already. You don’t argue with crazy.

    • D_C@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Furthermore aren’t, at least some of, his kids from ? The youngest psychopath is definitely of imported genetics, does that mean the next oppositional president (ha, like Fatboy is ever going to let go of all that power now he’s king of the us) could kick all tRUMPs offspring out?

  • HurlingDurling@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    10 hours ago

    At what point does everyone say “if he’s not following the law, then neither should we”?

    • Infinite@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Right, they only said “nobody can stop you from doing illegal things.”

      Completely different.

      • foggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        It was about whether or not a federal court can issue a nationwide injunction.

        The verdict has much more to do with active cases of deportees suing the US than it does to do with birthright citizenship.

    • Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      6 hours ago

      The supreme court did give the ok saying that it comes down to states and individuals to stop it.

      • foggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        That isn’t true. That is what sensationalist headlines said the verdict was. The verdict had nothing to do with birthright citizenship.

        We desperately need media literacy training as a species.

        https://youtu.be/BaAQCTMg_lk

        • Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          It is true. It’s not a ruling on birthright citizenship but it does stop the injunction against it.

          Edit to explain because I doubt you grasp: Without the injunction he’s free to act on a birthright citizenship ban unless sued by individuals or states on the behalf of said individuals. So over 20 states have no limit to this executive order pausing the deportation of people born in the US because they haven’t sued the federal government for breaking the 14th amendment.

          If anything this is far worse than just birthright citizenship because Trump can write executive orders far faster than lawsuits can be brought against the administration and lower federal courts can’t file injunctions against the administration, states or individuals have to sue.

          Again: The supreme court did give the ok, saying that it comes down to states and individuals to stop it because it removed the lower courts’ ability to file injunctions.

        • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Start media literacy training by never citing YouTube videos as sources. It’s far better to learn to read.

          • foggy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 hours ago

            The word for learning to read books is literacy.

            I was talking specifically about learning to read things that are not books.

  • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    Lest we forget:

    Fourteenth Amendment, 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.

    Pretty hard to argue that “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” doesn’t mean what it clearly states. It’s not even in legalese. The fact that this wasn’t laughed out of court says everything.

    • venusaur@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      They haven’t decided on the legality of it yet. They just decided that courts cannot issue universal injunctions. They can only stop it at a case by case level for those who are suing. If they decide it’s unconstitutional, then it’ll have to stop nationally, but a lot of damage can be done before then. I think they’ll decide in October…

    • TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      It is just a fucking piece of paper.

      If the judges and politicians and police don’t care and no one else can do anything then it means nothing.

      It is this or bloody revolution and that would lead to the US being invaded by multiple other countries and shit getting worse and worse.

      North Korea of America is where we are now.

      • thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Uggh. I can work out whether to upvote you for the accurate summary of the source of law & state power or downvote you for the utter idiocy of the invasion statement.

        Russia can’t - they’re struggling to take over a country a fifth their size and have burnt through their Soviet stockpiles.

        UK & EU certainly won’t invade, at most they’d send a peacekeeping force to protect civilians at a UN request (UN probably wouldnt pass it)

        Canada will be stretched just keeping fighting out of its borders.

        Mexico might just on principle (payback’s a bitch) but has bugger all capacity.

        Same for South American Asian and African countries.

        That leaves China, and if you think the Chinese are stupid enough to insert themselves in your civil war and create a sole enemy for both sides to fight you have zero understanding of the Chinese strategy.

        The Chinese will wait for you all to decimate the country and each other, then come in and buy up the bits they want. Oh and invade Taiwan while y’all are busy destroying your country.

        Putin’s plan to destroy the US has worked magnificently.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Canada will be stretched just keeping fighting out of its borders.

          Canada just needs to send one guy over to say “you should be our eleventh province” and most of New England will say “yes please, I’m sick of whatever shit the regressives are doing now”

        • Lemminary@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Mexico might just on principle (payback’s a bitch) but has bugger all capacity.

          More accurately, we literally can’t be bothered. Our state of affairs doesn’t allow for a war, and by that, I mean that a huge national protest would ensue, and many politicians would strike it down for many reasons. Nobody here is interested, and after fighting narcos for so long, we’d rather have peace.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 hours ago

        It is this or bloody revolution and that would lead to the US being invaded by multiple other countries and shit getting worse and worse.

        No other nations are going to be invading the US, let alone multiple of them. They don’t have the logistics for it.

    • WalnutLum@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      The problem is and has always been “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”

      People have been twisting that to mean that anyone that isn’t born to American citizen parents means that you are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

        • Laser@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Yeah, this is the thing that’s ignored because it would let the whole narrative collapse.

          Either you can’t deport them because they’re American citizens, or you can’t deport them because they’re not subject to your laws anyway. But in the end, this would just lead to (more) unlawful / illegal deportations.

  • WatDabney@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    99
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    15 hours ago

    So literally what happened here is Trump said, “I want to violate the Constitution” and the Supreme Court said, " Okay — go ahead."

    And that’s it for the rule of law in the US.

    All that’s left now is to tally the mass murders along the way to the inevitable collapse of the US, and to hope that our descendents can build something better out of the rubble.

    • venusaur@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      That’s not literally what happened at all. Trump said, “I want to violate the constitution and issued an order”. Then states cities and organizations sued across three cases and courts issued universal injunctions. Trump said “wah! Help me puppet kourt!” Then the Supreme Court was like, “be still mein führer. We will not allow these injunctions to apply to the entire nation. Only to those who have sued.”

      They gave him second base. Let’s see if they go all the way for Don Don.

      • BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I’m not a USer so correct me if wrong here, but is the implication then that something can be considered constitutional in one state but not in another? How does that work?

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          No. The core issue has not been decided. When courts in one state rule differently from courts in another, it goes up to federal court. When federal courts in different circuits rule differently, it goes up to SCOTUS. This issue isn’t at that point just yet.

        • chuymatt@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 hours ago

          It doesn’t. The ruling makes little sense and is just showing that playing the game with absolutely no ethics works very well.

  • mienshao@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    172
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    16 hours ago

    This is the final nail in the coffin of the Constitution. As a lawyer for the federal government, I need everyone to know that this officially marks the end of United States rule of law. Protect yourselves, and godspeed.

    • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I’m coping so hard by hoping that we swing very hard to the left, if only just so that these cynical, fossilized assholes live to see their bullshit rulings used against them.

    • redsand@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Billionaires and politicians. No one else matters. Don’t be distracted by the broke Nazis at ICE. The true threat numbers in the hundreds.

    • gatohaus@eviltoast.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      This is definitely worrisome.

      But is it the end of the Constitution quite yet?

      The Supreme Court hasn’t weighed in on the executive order trying to negate birthright citizenship, they said that lower courts couldn’t block EO’s at a national level.

      Implicitly, their not commenting on the EO feels like they’ll let it stand when the case arrives, if they choose to hear it. Then I’d say the US Constitution is toast.

      I’m an engineer, not a lawyer. I’d love to hear what someone more knowledgeable about this thinks.

        • NotAnotherLemmyUser@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          I’m not happy about this either, but let’s just make sure we’re all on the same page here:

          They ended the ability of the Judiciary to check the Executive.

          No, they ended the ability of the lower courts to check the executive nationwide. The supreme court can still check the executive (and the US Court of Appeals?).

          Now I’m trying to figure out if the lower courts can still check the executive, but only in their respective areas, or if they can make a decision, but it has to be confirmed by (at least?) the court of appeals.

          From what I’m reading here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/06/supreme-court-sides-with-trump-administration-on-nationwide-injunctions-in-birthright-citizenship-case/

          It looks like a lower court can still request to check the executive, but the higher courts will need to grant it. At least according to Kavanaugh’s opinion:

          the courts of appeals and the Supreme Court will inevitably weigh in on district court decisions granting or denying requests for preliminary injunctions.

          • voracitude@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Yes, let’s make sure we’re on the same page. You’re talking about theory, I’m talking about practice - which, in theory, are the same. In practice, however…

      • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Yes it is. Trump can effectively ignore any constitutional amendment for more than long enough to start sending people to concentration camps. This also probably isn’t the end of it, as I doubt the justices will be more willing to stand up to him in the future once he’s consolidated power further.

      • 𝕱𝖎𝖗𝖊𝖜𝖎𝖙𝖈𝖍@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        There isn’t going to be a single moment where the constitution stops existing. It’s not like a light switch. It’s a rapid erosion, like the start of a landslide, and the snow is already moving

  • WalnutLum@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I’m curious if this means that certain cities or states will become citizenship havens because their local courts decided to provide injunctions for their jurisdiction.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Probably not. I expect once the cases advance, SCOTUS will pick it up again fairly soon.

  • w3dd1e@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    11 hours ago

    I’d like to pay a reporter to ask Trump how it feels to wipe his ass with the Constitution. I’d think it would be coarse and unpleasant, but he keeps doing it.

    Ill just stick with Charmin or whatever.

    • WanderingThoughts@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Trump will then happily show his new line of merchandise. One is his “We The People” line of toilet paper. There’s also his “Smooth Criminal” line, extra soft toilet paper with the entire criminal law printed on it.

  • uss_entrepreneur@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    15 hours ago

    As much as I dislike the decision, they did not give the “ok”

    The ruling was about how the lower courts handle injunctions. The court cases are playing out still.

    I still hate the decision.

    • andrewta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Look at roe vs wade. The Supreme Court said it’s up to the states which effectively killed abortion . The end result is going to be basically the same thing here

    • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Effectively, anyone who does not have a lawyer who files a specific suit in a very short period of time can be deported at will. Saying it does not end the 14th Amendment is an exercise in English language mechanics, not in how it ends up affecting the world.

      If you are high school student who is shipped off to a foreign prison, how likely do you think it is somebody will fight to bring you back?

    • dis_honestfamiliar@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Bunch of pansies. All they had to do is say No

      And would have been the end of it. But they are scared of him for w/e reason. Trump can’t even remember Barrett.

    • Zier@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      13 hours ago

      His 1st & current wife were not citizens when those children were born. They should be deported.

  • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    12 hours ago

    On his first day back in office, Trump signed an executive order federal agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of children born in the United States who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also called a “green card” holder.

    So is this retroactive? Do states that are not challenging take effect in 30 days? Who the fuck knows. Make sure to do jack shit to stop all of this.

    https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-may-rule-allowing-enforcement-trump-birthright-citizenship-2025-06-27/