Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DallasNE

(7,936 posts)
31. Practical Aspect Considerations
Fri Dec 5, 2025, 11:06 PM
14 hrs ago

How does the Supreme Court draw a line other than birthright citizenship? This is the only country most of these people have ever lived in. Here are some examples of people born here with parents from various countries.

1. Mother is a citizen of Country A, and the father is a citizen of Country B.
2. Mother is a citizen of the USA, and the father is a citizen of Country B.
3. Mother and father are citizens of Country A.
4. Mother and father are USA citizens under birthright citizenship, with children born in the USA.

What country would the government deport these current citizens to? The country of the mother or father, and what happens if those countries won't take them, since they have never lived there. Does age make a difference? What is the start time for the age?

Now, let's go into multiple children born in the USA. Child A is 18, Child B is 12, and Child C is 3. Now apply that to the 4 examples above, also considering age.

The chaos would be unimaginable as millions of people would be affected.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

SCOTUS Sycophant Six plan to tamper with birthright citizenship, otherwise dobleremolque 22 hrs ago #1
Pretty sure we all know the answer Endlessmike56 22 hrs ago #2
You're exactly right. PSPS 21 hrs ago #7
13th, 14th and 15th are invalid? Retrograde 20 hrs ago #13
He'll cite another 17th century Brit jurist wolfie001 18 hrs ago #25
'Executive Orders as Lawmaking' needs to end C_U_L8R 22 hrs ago #3
This court, this regime 31st Street Bridge 22 hrs ago #4
They are making their move to completely take over our laws bluestarone 22 hrs ago #5
Precedence... Republicans say that Hitler did some good things. Norrrm 22 hrs ago #6
I have to believe they will rule against Trump iemanja 21 hrs ago #8
Impeaching them would just have the Republicans blocking it (nt) muriel_volestrangler 21 hrs ago #9
I didn't mean now iemanja 19 hrs ago #14
Impeachment needs two thirds in the Senate muriel_volestrangler 19 hrs ago #17
You're probably right. iemanja 19 hrs ago #21
Such a ruling would instantly make the court powerless and irrelevant Fiendish Thingy 21 hrs ago #11
Has a transition team been assigned for when he, well, you know, croaks. twodogsbarking 21 hrs ago #10
Roughly like this? muriel_volestrangler 21 hrs ago #12
No dissents to the grant of certiorari were noted. onenote 19 hrs ago #15
SCOTUS already granted certiorari months ago for the injunction issue (with vociferous dissents from the 3 liberals). SunSeeker 16 hrs ago #29
You are mistaken. onenote 13 hrs ago #32
It is you who is mistaken. There is absolutely no basis to suggest that Sotomayor, Jackson and Kagan have flipped. SunSeeker 12 hrs ago #33
I'm absolutely, positively not wrong. onenote 12 hrs ago #35
Sotomayor, Jackson and Kagan have not flipped. You are dead wrong in suggesting they did. nt SunSeeker 12 hrs ago #36
Wow. Just wow. onenote 1 hr ago #38
john brown's body struggle4progress 19 hrs ago #16
Battle Cry of Freedom struggle4progress 19 hrs ago #18
Marching Through Georgia struggle4progress 19 hrs ago #19
Nazi Punks Fuck Off struggle4progress 19 hrs ago #20
This is the litmus test case I have been fearing. TomSlick 18 hrs ago #22
Originalists, my ass! WTF is there to decide? OMGWTF 18 hrs ago #23
While they are at it just give him immunity..............oh yeah the 6 maga POS already did that........... turbinetree 18 hrs ago #24
Absolutely disgusting. There is no reason to take up Trump's patently ridiculous argument. SunSeeker 17 hrs ago #26
They took this case in order to overturn the law. johnnyfins 17 hrs ago #27
It just takes four to agree to take a case Dangling0826 17 hrs ago #28
Asking seriously: which is easier... Shipwack 15 hrs ago #30
Expansion is by simple Congressional legislation. Blasphemer 12 hrs ago #34
Practical Aspect Considerations DallasNE 14 hrs ago #31
Imo, fwiw, which is nothing... lonely bird 2 hrs ago #37
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Supreme Court agrees to d...»Reply #31