• Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Well, the thing about being a criminal is that it means you’ve been convicted of a crime.

    Trump is a criminal. But he was born in the US to US citizens.

    The goal is to make all sorts of things crimes such that it’s almost impossible to function in the US as a foreigner without committing a crime. At that point, the government can choose the people to deport at their whim.

    Since birthright citizenship is being struck down, and this government interprets the constitution as only applicable to citizens, expect Trump to attempt again to pass legislation for more types of citizenship nullification.

    One tricky bit is, if you’re declared legally dead, you immediately become an illegal resident if you’re still alive. And DOGE has already declared a number of people dead by misinterpreting a few databases.

    • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      11 hours ago

      One tricky bit is, if you’re declared legally dead, you immediately become an illegal resident if you’re still alive. And DOGE has already declared a number of people dead by misinterpreting a few databases.

      I can almost imagine this being written by Douglas adams, but the consequences a little too depressing. You know, in contrast to the complete destruction of the earth

    • xyzzy@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Birthright citizenship was not struck down. Universal injunctions were struck down, which means the Constitution will be applied in any cases where a state has a law on the books or a class action suit has been brought and a statewide injunction has been declared. These suits will wind their way through the courts and may possibly be heard by the Supreme Court.

      I’d like to predict the USSC would decline to hear the case because there would be no discrepancies in prior rulings and the legal question would be so obvious, but I’ve given up trying to predict this court. In any event, I do think it’s unlikely they would rule against birthright citizenship, since it would be plainly unconstitutional and there’s no real wiggle room to reinterpret it differently.