Eager to test it
The Times on Trump’s attack on the 14th Amendment:
Doing away with birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants was an idea Mr. Trump pitched as a presidential candidate, but there is no clear indication that he would be able to do so unilaterally, and attempting to would be certain to prompt legal challenges. The consensus among legal scholars is that he cannot, but Mr. Trump and his allies are eager to test it in the Supreme Court.
Naturally. They lost the popular vote by over 3 million in a heavily gerrymandered election, so why wouldn’t they be eager to destroy the amendment that covers equal rights for all citizens?
“We all cherish the language of the 14th Amendment, but the Supreme Court of the United States has never ruled on whether the language of the 14th Amendment — ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’ — applies specifically to people who are in the country illegally,” Vice President Mike Pence told Politico in an interview on Tuesday, several hours after Mr. Trump’s comments were reported.
Well now there’s a big fat lie. Pence doesn’t “cherish the language of the 14th Amendment” – if he did he never would have gone near Trump and his administration.
Mr. Trump told Axios that while he initially believed he needed a constitutional amendment or action by Congress to make the change, the White House Counsel’s Office has advised him otherwise.
“Now they’re saying I can do it just with an executive order,” Mr. Trump said. The White House did not immediately respond to requests for clarification of the legal grounds the president’s lawyers have given him for validating such a move.
His discussion of the idea comes after the administration announced it was streaming more than 5,000 active-duty troops to the southern border, part of an election-season rash of executive action Mr. Trump has undertaken as he works to energize his anti-immigrant base.
That is, as he works to inflame his rabidly racist “base.” That’s all this is: naked shameless racism.
“We all cherish the language of the 14th Amendment,” but also I feel like throwing it away because it is convenient to my voting base.
Wait, is it Mike Pence’s argument that people in the country illegally are not subject to the jurisdiction of, or within the jurisdiction of, the United States or any individual State?
Would that mean that if a person who is in the country illegally commits a crime against a citizen, the US and the individual States would have no standing to prosecute the perpetrator, due to a lack of jurisdiction? Can the person even be said to be in the country “illegally” if they’re not under US jurisdiction?
This is the argument that “tough on crime” Rethuglicans want to make?
Of course not, Karellen, don’t be silly!
It means the perpetrator would have no right to due process.
They all cherish the language of the 14th amendment. Who doesn’t? All those “therein”s and “whereof”s , and sentences that never end, it’s glorious! The actual content and meaning of it? Well, not so much, no.