Summary

The ACLU filed a federal lawsuit challenging President Trump’s executive order to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. if their parents are unlawfully present or have temporary legal status.

The order, set to take effect in 30 days, conflicts with the 14th Amendment, which guarantees birthright citizenship, upheld by the Supreme Court in 1898.

Critics argue the order creates a “subclass” of noncitizens, undermining fairness and equality.

The lawsuit seeks to block the order, which also directs agencies to stop issuing passports and recognizing affected children as citizens.

  • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    3 days ago

    Critics argue the order creates a “subclass” of noncitizens, undermining fairness and equality. ??? Its literally unconstitutional. It directly says to not follow a specific part of the constitution. I would think that would be critique one. Its a non starter. No agency should follow it with a memo stating its unconstitutional nature that they send back to the requesting person or body who sent it down (who should not of but instead do the same thing)

      • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        what unconstitutional things have went in the last four years not part of the courts (who unfortunately can virtually change it do to their interpretation power)

        • candybrie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          If you have to qualify with not part of the one of the three branches of government, your argument doesn’t really hold.

          • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            the courts are that way because of letting the republicans hold office!!! Who knows how conservative the courts will get in the next four years of appointments. It completely holds.

            • candybrie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              The point being made is that “unconstitutional” doesn’t exist for Republicans anymore. Since the court decides what is and isn’t constitutional and they’ve given up any attempt at appearing not to be partisan hacks, what the Constitution says doesn’t matter.

              • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                ah. I see to much. dur dur. this is the democrats fault because they were not enough better than republicans. even though I personally think they are light years apart. I mean mostly because of how bad republicans are nowadays but still. so I took the comment to be like biden was all unconstitutional and I was like. WHAT!

                • candybrie@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  17 hours ago

                  It wasn’t to blame Democrats. Amy Coney Barrett and the make-up of SCOTUS just changed roughly 4 years ago.

                  • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    17 hours ago

                    yeah that is the exactly the type of thing that drives me nuts with that type of thing. I get yours is not but I will get folks not taking any of that type of stuff into account and then we get more backsliding and such.