Although not necessarily a progressive, let's start with the leftist actor John Wilkes Booth.-----hint you're on the losing end of this and probably don't want to continue.
Whatever. Getting goofy. Anyway, let's get this going up through the courts. The dems will try to drag it out, which will only serve to create an opportunity for Trump to appoint yet another justice. WINNING!!!!!
This is another argument against the status quo interpretation. Is it even feasible to regulate the border and prevent persons coming into the jurisdictions in question?
Almost all of us, regardless of political persuasion, want this. The idea that half the country is in favor of "open borders" is nonsense perpetrated by the extreme right. What there is legitimate disagreement about is how to handle those kids that because of poor enforcement of immigration policy ended up being born to those here illegally and have grown up in the U.S. and never known any other country. They are just as American as you or I. It would be heartless, foolish, counter productive and wrong to punish them now for mistakes that we citizens made years ago. Give them a fair and relatively easy path to citizenship, but for god sake correct the situation that led to this dilemma, and prevent it, to the maximum extent possible, from happening in the future. Adopt sane and clear rules and then enforce them. I strongly disagree with those who would kick out educated, productive members of our society that have grown up here and never known or identified with any other country . We must keep our word to the DACA young Americans! Ted Cruz is wrong! Virtually everyone agrees we must develop an efficient way to track those here on visas (the real problem) and see that they don't overstay them. We must impose E-verify on employers and have strict enforcement. The numbers coming across the border illegally slowed to a trickle under Obama. It was insignificant, despite what our demagogue, criminal President would have us believe. Separating parents from children and then losing track of them is not the thing to do. It is criminal and cruel. There are sane ways to handle large numbers of refugees trying to enter the country. It will require more resources and man power and a clear, humane policy. We must coordinate these efforts with Mexico and Latin American Countries. It's time we got smart about the way to handle this situation. Tiny amounts of money are involved relative to our national budget. Trump has made a bad situation worse. He has greatly exaggerated the refugee problem. He is attempting to make scapegoats of these unfortunate souls and is using them to instill irrational fear. We can handle the refugee situation, but can we handle Trump before he wrecks our country?
I believe you meant what you said here. The funny thing is Trump was to the left of you on this and Schumer and the Democrats said no. I am sure every person would agree that we could give a few thousand people a path to citizenship if we ceased bringing in a million or more people a year for a decade or two and closed the border to illegal immigration. Lets give wages a chance to rise to much higher levels. Lets get our workers retired before the robot revolution and then in 20 to 30 years revising our immigration policies.
Not as goofy as you think. If scotus overturns same sex marriages what happens to the marriages on the books?
If wikipedia is correct there is no Supreme Court ruling or law stating we must grant anchor babies citizenship. If that is true President Trump could arguably be clarifying proper US security policy which has not been followed. It can argued that this within his purview as Chief Executive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchor_baby As of 2015, there has been no Supreme Court decision that explicitly holds that persons born in the U.S. to illegal aliens are automatically afforded U.S. citizenship.[24][25][26][27][28][29] Edward Erler, writing for the Claremont Institute, said that since the Wong Kim Ark case dealt with someone whose parents were in the United States legally, it provides no valid basis under the 14th Amendment for the practice of granting citizenship to U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants. He goes on to argue that if governmental permission for parental entry is a necessary requirement for bestowal of birthright citizenship, then children of illegal aliens must surely be excluded.[30] note: I do think that our Country needs to have a ruling on this issue of anchor babies and the Constitution. I really don't like seeing an E.O. on this issue but how else will it get in front of the Supreme Court. Congress will not pass a law on this subject until the voters agree with the cronies who own Congress.
Constitutional Law Professor Jonathan Turley On President Trump Having a Case To End Birthright Citizenship Jonathan Turley, Constitutional Law Professor at George Washington University spoke with Brian Kilmeade about President Trump preparing to use an Executive Order that would end "Birthright" citizenship. Professor Turley says the President does have a case because the 14th Amendment's ambiguous wording "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". Turley explains that many of the drafters believe the 14th Amendment says you have a birthright citizenship if you're either a citizen or a legal resident but not if you are undocumented or a diplomat or a tourist. Plus, Turley on why he doesn't believe Robert Mueller has a prosecutable or credible obstruction case against President Trump. https://radio.foxnews.com/2018/10/3...-having-a-case-to-end-birthright-citizenship/