Posted on 08/16/2015 10:35:33 AM PDT by markomalley
Donald Trump plans to undo President Obama's executive orders on immigration, get rid of birthright citizenship, and deport all undocumented immigrants if he is elected president, he said Sunday.
Birthright citizenship "remains the biggest magnet for illegal immigration," Trump said in his 6-page immigration policy report titled "Immigration Reform That Will Make America Great Again."
Speaking to NBC's Chuck Todd aboard his gilded private plane on "Meet the Press" Sunday, Trump said of the current illegal immigrants in the country, "We're going to keep the families together, but they have to go."
When Todd questioned where they would go if they have nowhere to return to, Trump repeated, "We will work with them. They have to go. Chuck, we either have a country, or we don't have a country."
Trump said that Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., helped him come up with specific policies on immigration, and that he will streamline the process for becoming a legal citizen. He plans to triple the number of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, require companies to hire American workers first and mandate nationwide e-certify usage, among other measures.
"Before any new green cards are issued to foreign workers abroad, there will be a pause where employers will have to hire from the domestic pool of unemployed immigrant and native workers," the report outlines.
In the report, Trump reiterates that he will make Mexico pay for the wall. He plans to do this by impounding "remittance payments derived from illegal wages," increasing "fees on all temporary visas issued to Mexican CEOs and diplomats" and fees on border crossing cards, North American Free Trade Agreement worker visas from Mexico and fees at ports of entry to the United States from Mexico.
"We will not be taken advantage of anymore," Trump said.
Obama's executive order that protects illegal immigrants' children, called Dreamers, from deportation, "we have to" rescind, Trump told Todd on Sunday.
"We have to make a whole new set of standards and when people come in, they have to come in legally," he said.
Trump said he will fix the immigration system so that illegal immigrants who work could quickly return — legally.
End birthright citizenship. This remains the biggest magnet for illegal immigration. By a 2:1 margin, voters say it’s the wrong policy, including Harry Reid who said “no sane country” would give automatic citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants.
That is pretty nebulous to me. Does he mean that he would support simply repealing the 14th Amendment? That he would try to pass some legislation that would pass SCOTUS muster (maybe with a "not subject to judicial review" clause) that prohibited citizenship to children of illegal aliens? Or what?
I don't know if I want the government to be able to grant citizenship or decide who is worthy. If Øbama had that kind of power, none of us would have been allowed to retain our citizenship (since, according to the DHS, Right Wing Extremists (like religious folks, like pro-lifers, like pro-small government people) are the greatest threat to the country. Just as I'm sure that none of the legislators who voted in favor of the 14th Amendment could have ever dreamed, in their worst nightmares, that it would be used to justify anchor babies, I look at the other side of the coin.
If he means a careful re-wording of the 14th Amendment to eliminate anchor babies, that's fine. Otherwise...
The current interpretation giving citizenship to children of illegals and tourists is bogus. It isn’t supported by the 14th Amendment at all. It was something made up by bureaucrats and judges in the past 50 years or so.
Sen. Vitter has legislation to end “birthright” citizenship for children born to people who are under the jurisdiction of another country. (Rand Paul supported that legislation in 2011 but hasn’t said anything about it since then; another reason he’s losing voters to Trump.)
Clever rebelious black robes and barister saboteurs did, and continue, to rip our fabric to shreds
The answer is to just determine ... "No, is doesn't mean isn't and I don't give a shit WHAT you say"
“gilded private plane” and “gilded helicopter” multiple references lately.
“Birthright citizenship” has never been enshrined in law.
It was taken from an opinion of a Supreme Court judge in the 1980s.
There are lots of people who are born in the US who are not citizens - the children of ambassadors for example.
And that's the reason why any change must be VERY carefully worded so that some future evil administration (and there will be one if the US survives...) will pervert the lack of protection as to where they can autonomously strip citizenship of whomever they disapprove...and the court would approve of the action since there's nothing preventing it.
Again, I wholeheartedly agree with doing what is necessary to eliminate the concept of anchor babies. But we have to tread carefully so we don't leave our progeny vulnerable to some future tyrant.
I think that as a minimum we as a country should at least define circumstances like FOREIGN CITIZENS of another country having children born here is NOT Birthright Citizenship. Further, illegals, persons on VISAs or any other non-citizenship presence here does not qualify, either.
We have to stop these illegal Mexicans who drop a baby here from getting their meal tickets declared citizens.
I think we are the only country left that allows birthright citizenship ie anchor babies and we need to get rid of it.
Birthright citizenship, anchor babies, and chain migration are what has destroyed California. I may have to vote for him twice.
I suppose congress could pass a bill that defines
what the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means.
-
http://www.federalistblog.us/2007/09/revisiting_subject_to_the_jurisdiction/
-
“...children born to parents who owed no foreign allegiance,
not merely those born within its limits, were to be citizens of the United States...”
“Trumping” this, to me, would mean one of
(1) Constitutional amendment
(2) Doing something to the USSC (conservative packing?)
(3) Pulling an Andrew Jackson
I’d really be curious what the Donald has in mind. Politics IS the art of the possible.
D Trump proposes 2 more in a Republican Senate and voila !
(PLUS replace the dead one now living)
Kind of a reverse FDR move
“...the number of supremes does not HAVE to be nine, Trump proposes 2 more...”
-
9 - 11 ... why stop there?
I wish some candidate would say that he would just blanket undo all of The Won’s EO’s just on the basis that anything O did was probably bad, then that they would be reviewed one by one and if anything worthwhile was found, it would be reinstated. That way the message is clear that the default is to just ASSUME that anything Obama did is invalid until proven otherwise.
Too bad Swoonin Noonan voted for the Tyrant that destroyed America.
Barack Hussein Osama
Yes, Obama is Swahili for Osama.
How do you explain the 14th Amendment?
Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Which has been judicially interpreted as including the children of those present without permission.
The original idea however was to protect the freedmen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.