I'm surprised so many conservatives support Trump ending the 14th amendment.
If a president makes it so they can just undo amendments, that sets up a precedent that other amendments are just as disposable.
Basically if you support Trump making it easy to erase the 14th amendment, you are making it easier to erase others.
Like the 2nd amendment.
Never thought Republicans would support setting up a system that would make letting the Democrats get rid of the 2nd Amendment down the road easier but here we are.
He is not ending it, just interpreting it correctly.
Luis Gutierrez
This is a concern for Senate leniency over the Constitution too.
Henry Johnson
First post, ONLY post.
Jaxson Powell
This. The guy who wrote it even said it was so blacks and Red Indians couldn't be excluded, not for foreigners.
Robert Ward
Dems cucked by Trump troll arguments again.
"I want to end part of the 14th amendment by executive order."
"No, you can't do that it violates the constitution."
"Okay, I guess your right. That means that Obama era Dreamer executive orders were unconstitutional because he violated the "take care clause" in Art. II § 3."
"..."
Ryan Green
Spoiler: they've repealed an amendment before
Cameron Miller
>I'm surprised so many conservatives support Trump ending the 14th Amendment. Stop it right there you weasel. Anchor baby citizenship isn't protected by the 14th amendment. Relevant 14th referencing Supreme Court precedent was for a case involving a child of parents legally residing in the US.
Robert Howard
Fpbp
Landon Rodriguez
You absolutely do not need to repeal that amendment to stop anchor baby citizenship. Don't let people like OP meme that bullshit claim.
Eli Anderson
>comparing immigration rights of non citizens to rights of actual citizens Moshe plz..
Carter Jackson
It’s an interpretation of an amendment. Just like how the 2nd Amendment has been creatively interpreted to somehow spin “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” into the 30,000 gun laws we have today.
Lucas Wilson
Really Trump wants a discussion. The 14th amendment needs to be called into question and eventually repealed.
Eli Hernandez
I'd love it if they tried to repeal the second, finally get this war started.
Samuel Watson
this
Jose Evans
No, the EO forces the Supreme Court to make a final determination on whether or not the 14th amendment is grants citizenship to foreigners born on U.S. soil. The Supreme Court will rule that foreigners born on U.S. soil do not gain automatic citizenship. If the Supreme Court rejects hearing a case for the EO, then Trumps EO orders stands. The only other way to stop Trump's EO is if Congress gets off its fat ass and finally passes legislation clarifying whether or not foreigners born on U.S. soil are granted citizenship. It is 4D chess because no matter what happens, Trump wins.
By all means, the Democrats can go ahead and try to get rid of the 2nd Amendment. These are two completely different issues. One will spark a Civil War. Can you guess which one?
Jayden Garcia
I wonder if the framers of the Constitution intended for illegal foreign invaders to be able to come into the USA, have kids, and claim citizenship. Like if Hitler got pregnant, snuck across the border somehow in the middle of WWII, plopped out a baby, then went home with it, would the intention have been for his baby to be a US citizen? I don't think so.
Caleb Sanders
fun fact: the democrats will fall for it again
Henry Torres
If demoshits weren't corrupt communist globalist criminal retards we could just do the obvious and amend the Constitution to prevent it's exploitation from foreign invaders. But the demoshits get votes from these foreign criminals, so maybe we need martial law and military tribunals before we can clean up Congress enough to do it the right way.
Jeremiah Young
Look into the 2nd amendment, it also is interpreted (by Democrats too) to not apply to tourists and illegals.
The Supreme Court has never once in U.S. history ruled on whether the Fourteenth Amendment gives birthright citizenship to anyone, and especially to babies of illegal immigrants.
It's past time to settle this issue at the Supreme Court.
Caleb Price
Nobody cares what happened in muttland.
David Butler
>well regulated militia >can only own firearms if you're in the national guard
>a majority of the Supreme Court mentioned in passing that "the phrase 'subject to its jurisdiction' was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States"
>the Supreme Court denied the birthright citizenship claim of an American Indian. The court ruled that being born in the territory of the United States is not sufficient for citizenship; those who wish to claim citizenship by birth must be born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
Pretty reasonable to me. We exclude you on purpose if you come here for certain business, we exclude you on purpose if you're not obeying US law because tribal land, now we're excluding you on purpose if you're illegal, which was the operating assumption until a few decades ago.
Logan Russell
It's when they delete the 13th that shit's gonna get real
