Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Supreme Court upholds broad conception of birthright citizenship

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 681 posts

Re: Supreme Court upholds broad conception of birthright citizenship

#231

Post by atonse »

sleepyguy wrote: post #213
bigmadshoe wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have much evidence that this is a real problem on the scale of the US population? I would imagine a tiny percentage of citizens were anchor children (i.e. people whose parents came to the US purely to give birth to them, then left again)

[flagged]

Sources for your numbers? I'm curious to learn more about how widespread this issue is. I personally have heard of 2-3 cases in my small social circle, so to me it feels more common. But I am having trouble finding actual numbers.

Re: Supreme Court upholds broad conception of birthright citizenship

#233

Post by bigmadshoe »

sleepyguy wrote: post #213
bigmadshoe wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have much evidence that this is a real problem on the scale of the US population? I would imagine a tiny percentage of citizens were anchor children (i.e. people whose parents came to the US purely to give birth to them, then left again)

[flagged]

30k-60k out of >3m births doesn’t seem like a massive problem to me. Maybe the energy spent fighting this could be better spent elsewhere.

Re: Supreme Court upholds broad conception of birthright citizenship

#236

Post by tencentshill »

sleepyguy wrote: post #74

[flagged]

Then you can the work to get Congress to ratify an amendment. Donate, campaign, maybe even run for office yourself! We still do things democratically, not by executive order. Authoritarians will always offer the easy way out.

Re: Supreme Court upholds broad conception of birthright citizenship

#237

Post by wat10000 »

raverbashing wrote: post #21
999900000999 wrote: post #4

Thank God. If only because this would open up people born here to having their citizenship retroactively revoked. The constitution is pretty clear. If you don't like it amend it. If anything we need to expand it to include anyone who gives birth in this country. If you're willing to deal with our horrible maternity care system and help keep up our declining population, you deserve a blue passport.

> If only because this would open up people born here to having their citizenship retroactively revoked. No, that's not how laws work Applying laws retroactively is much less common than a "simple" rule change

This wouldn't really be applying laws retroactively, but deciding what the law has always meant. If the decided meaning is that children of illegal immigrants are not automatically citizens, that means they weren't automatically citizens beforehand. Thus there wouldn't really be anything to revoke, they just never were citizens in the first place.

The executive order that prompted this was only aimed at babies born after it went into effect, but I see no reason it would have to be that way.

Re: Supreme Court upholds broad conception of birthright citizenship

#239

Post by hacker_homie »

ceejayoz wrote: post #230
rayiner wrote: post #90

[flagged]

> whether the child is “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. at birth If I strangle said child in the maternity ward, do you think the US will go "whoops, no jurisdiction!"

that would be jurisdiction on you committing murder, which they do have.

Re: Supreme Court upholds broad conception of birthright citizenship

#240

Post by mr_00ff00 »

shimman wrote: post #223
padjo wrote: post #114

The crazy thing here is that 4 supposedly conservative Supreme Court justices wanted to overturn over a century of precedent on how the constitution was interpreted.

Our entire history of a nation is the people fighting against the ruling minority of tyrants. Look at how fast SCOTUS struck down the civil rights act of 1875 (only 8 years). Look at how quickly slavers used the federal government to uphold slavery, the fugitive slave act was one of the first things Congress signed and took zero time enforcing against the will of the people. Look at how quickly business leaders fough…

What about the constitution specifically?

You are saying this like there are other of nations that didn’t need to struggle for equal rights, workers’ right etc.

Post reply on HN