https://www.youtube.com/live/qntd3XZ3qQs?si=3cSAmvNynlqAkBvF

Market where cons can 5x their money:

https://polymarket.com/event/scotus-strikes-down-trumps-birthright-citizenship-eo

Edit: odds of EO being struck down have risen from 81% to 89% since oral argument began. cons ITT can now 10x their money

Edit 2: 94% now. 20x opportunity

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49785531)

subject to the jurisdiction thereof meant and means something.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786001)

but this reminds me of when i saw the A+ exam from my con law class. it was unbelievable, it was so insanely precise and thorough i couldn't have written it with all the time and resources in the world. it looked like a history dissertation and some asshole just spit it out in three hours from memory.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49785808)

Do you think a duly elected president who controls both houses of congress shouldn't be able to change a law he thinks is bad?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786818)

https://x.com/greg_price11/status/2039362006000500874?s=61

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49785825)

I suppose you could have some separate process, where we create an agency tasked with registering citizenship for new babbies, but this would be a huge undertaking -- you'd need new offices in thousands of cities and towns, and probably at least half of proles would never bother with taking their babby to register him/her/they.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786068)

EPAH is making the same argument Dems do about why voter ID should be illegal. "But how will the poor unfortunate oppressed peoples ever get it together enough to obtain a social security card and a Driver's License! It's not fair to deny my benighted brothaz and sistaz! It's basically IMPOSSIBLE to obtain ID so we shouldn't do it."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786488)

Look, they make this work in Europe, so it's clearly not an insurmountable obstacle. But maybe you should think five minutes about how it will work before you start mocking EPAH. I was born in Germany because my parents were in the military. I have a German birth certificate. I am not a German citizen, though, because there is no birthright citizenship in Germany. I don't know how you prove citizenship in a jus sanguinis country, but it's not by denying birth certificates to people who are born to non-citizens.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786626)

cmon man, i don't have to know exactly how it works to know its possible, i just need to see that it already exists. you cant explain rocket science to me but you know rockets exist right?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786768)

But let's go back to whether KJ's question was stupid, as so many 100-110IQ posters seem to conclude. If you were the administration or the SG who had developed this proposal, do you think it'd be ridiculous to simultaneously conceive of a plan for how it would be implemented? Or would you just say, "Starting today this is the New Law. No idea how to Implement this, but I just need to see that it already Exists to know that We can do it."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786807)

no, i dont think the court needs to weigh in on enforcement. the court decides what the law is. they could decide birthright isn't a constitutional right and a future administration could stop deporting non-citizens. no law could ever be enforced perfectly anyway, it's up to other branches to decide how much effort and money to spend on it. not every murder will be solved, yet we still prohibit murder.

you're right that it will be very difficult to administer perfectly and a lot of kids will become citizens when they shouldn't have. something being difficult to enforce has no impact on whether it should be legal. you and i do illegal things every day like speeding. the fact speeding can not bebperfectly enforced doesnt mean it should be legal to drive at any speed.

also when it comes to interpreting the constitution enforcement has 0% to so with it. if the constitution says the government must provide me with five wives, the fact that it's impossible for every man to have five wives doesn't change what it says. it's not the province of the courts to opine on the wisdom of the law.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786861)

And this isn't strictly a "the Constitution says" case. It's about whether POTUS has the authority to make this rule. If it were purely constitutional, it wouldn't be applied only prospectively, as that dude with the raspy voice explained. So if you're taking this case to SCOTUS, you obviously need to be prepared to field that question.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786929)

But I suppose it should be the proponents' task to say, "here's the proposal, and here's how we are going to implement it."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49788255)

In the US, the hospital fills out and applies for your SSN, registers your birth cert. If born outside the US, you just fill out a form and apply for a SSN and citizenship for your kid. Once obtained, its considered to be obtained since birth.

Are you really retarded? Just apply for a SSN, passport, etc . We do it all the time for Americans born abroad.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49788716)

Citizenship can only be established at the time of birth if the mother provides proof of citizenship (birth certificate or passport). It's just like paternity, which can only be confirmed at the time of birth by a blood sample from the putative father(s).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786516)

but even your fix requires letting those already born here keep their citizenship, right? this will not be retroactive

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786537)

Retroactive citizenship denial (aka citizenship revocation) is extremely difficult because it involves the "true" country of citizenship's cooperation. You can't have people just become stateless.

A more rational approach would be to audit the birth records and cross-reference the data with immigration records (e.g., entry/exit times + country of citizenship) + social security records and SSS records. Start with those who haven't registered for the SSS within 30 days of their 18th birthday.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786594)

but, i have no problem making their babies citizens of their home countries even after mommy and daddy become us citizens. hold off having your kids, bitches.

anyway, under what you are saying...prove your status even if it's not us citizenship and maybe those kids could be us citizens.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786821)

yeah, no

the allegiance for the baby would occur when baby's parents' application to become citizens is approved, not before

tldr. it doesn't have to be instant and automatic

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786857)

huge huge huge

if only say birth certificates after april 2, 2026 included citizenship status. yes, no, indeterminate.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49788340)

you ask the parents

if they claim to be legals, but forget proof, the baby gets the indeterminate box marked

i'd also make it a crime to lie, btw

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49791215)

what happens? your citizenship remains in limbo

who enforces? depends on the context. election workers, public benefit workers, etc

do i think? one of us does. not you.

major administrative issues not thought about at all? lol, go fuck yourself. let's let them all in under bullshit asylum claims. hell, we'll even fly them in at taxpayer expense. let's line the pockets of ngos. etc.

libs have scum for brains

libs have shit for brains

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49797949)

a lot of people are getting stuck on how this is impossible to prove conclusively. but almost nothing is able to be proved conclusively! we have an income tax system even though its impossible to be certain a person has reported all their income.

the government already has to meet a very high burden when challenging if someone obtained their citizenship legally. people claiming birthright citizenship would be protected by that same high standard. yeah, a lot of people will get off when they shouldn't, and sadly some innocents may be punished unjustly, but that is the case with almost every law!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49788695)

https://x.com/atrupar/status/2039360113350189428?s=46

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49785892)

https://x.com/atrupar/status/2039357840826011863?s=46

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49785920)

uh, i think the drafters were very pro anchor baby

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49785944)

there are probably somewhere between 50-100 million illegals and children of illegals in the country, maybe more

now AI is coming out and automating away most jobs

and *now*, 60 years too late (1965 immigration act), they're considering the topic of birthright immigration?

its way too late, wayyyyyyyyyy too late, either way on this issue

and ICE isn't going to do shit regardless of the ruling

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786165)

i could give you plenty of data links - SOURCE?? SOURCE?? the reddit lib sneered - but it's not necessary

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786224)

BUT if you want 'so we looked at the data' evidence, just compare the rates of change in public school systems. For example like in Ector County, Texas (Odessa). When the book Friday Night Lights came out in 1988-1989, Ector County ISD was like 30-35% Hispanic. Now it is 82.2% Hispanic.

The thing with public school data is that it shows the future without the spin. Every public school wants mo money fo dem programs and will religiously count every head and document the data.

Additionally, all you have to do is check demographics vs school data for % below poverty line (ie., qualify for free lunch). For example, you will see a majority in the case of Ector County, 71.5% claim to quality for free lunch. Now this is in a part of the country where any able bodied man can get a job in the oilfield paying 70-100K annually without a high school diploma. Near 3/4 apparently are growing up below the poverty line but if you were to drive over there, you'd see 50K plus vehicles are a dime a dozen. It's all fraud lies and cream pies and a sham. They have sucked USA dry.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5852299&forum_id=2/en-en/#49786428)