• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

this makes me nervous

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
I do my best to avoid political discussions like one would avoid the plague. I also suspect this thread will degrade into political arguing based on party affiliation and if you are or are not a Trump supporter.

I am not taking a political side here and as for Trump, that is not the issue that is making me nervous.

It is this that has me concerned. And it is not because it is Trump and it is not that Trump is going to try and do it nor what he is trying to do as it applies to immigrants and birthrights

Trump eyeing executive order to end birthright citizenship, a move most legal experts say runs afoul of the Constitution

Think about this for a second, with you politically shaded glasses off.

If a sitting president, regardless of party affiliation, can get rid of an amendment to the constitution with an executive order then which one of the Amendments is next on the chopping block simply because the President does not think it is right or his political party wants him to eliminate that amendment.....Guns become illegal, slavery is back, unreasonable search and seizure, right to a fair trial, excessive fines and cruelty ok...all by executive order. I realize they do not pay as much attention to the Constitution as they should in good ole Washington DC (on both sides of the political coin) but to be able to negate an amendment to the Constitution...all with an executive order from the President...that makes me nervous and could potentially take this country places we simply do not want to go.

Now to wait and see if it is actually legal for him to do it

A list of amendments of the Constitution just think with the stroke of a pen, from 1 man or woman....they could be gone... that I hope, is not possible
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
Worries me, too. But I don't think this will actually happen.
 

David1967

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I don't know enough about the details of this to make a solid judgment. But it may have something to do with the subject of "Anchor Babies", where a person comes here illegally with the intention of having a baby for the purpose of that child becoming an automatic citizen. If that is what this is about, I do not believe that someone who is here unlawfully and has a baby should expect that child to be an automatic U.S. citizen. If the parents are here lawfully and have a baby, I don't have a problem with that. Whether or not the president can do such a thing constitutionally? IDK. Will be interesting to see.
 
Trump made a huge display of pristine and sheer ignorance by saying that birthright, known in legal terms as Ius Soli, is observed only in the US. That makes me even more nervous because it means the the US president doesn't even bother to consult with legal experts before opening his pie hole and blabberingim in at least 20 countries, including Canada that is the case. I don't expect Trump to know that many things but I would like for him to admit to his ignorance and consult legal experts before making up stuff and look and sound stupid...it doesn't do anything to improve the image that Americans have right now in the world
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
I don't know enough about the details of this to make a solid judgment. But it may have something to do with the subject of "Anchor Babies", where a person comes here illegally with the intention of having a baby for the purpose of that child becoming an automatic citizen. If that is what this is about, I do not believe that someone who is here unlawfully and has a baby should expect that child to be an automatic U.S. citizen. Whether or not the president can do such a thing constitutionally? IDK. Will be interesting to see.
Right, I believe the issue isn't so much the topic (another discussion entirely), but the precedence it would set. Imagine if a Democrat decides to take the oval for a spin in a few years. They decide to unilaterally re-write the second amendment. Or perhaps they don't like drinking and decides to give the 21st the ax while Congress is in recess? Due process is very important, in my opinion.
 

David1967

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Right, I believe the issue isn't so much the topic (another discussion entirely), but the precedence it would set. Imagine if a Democrat moves in a few years. They decide to unilaterally re-write the second amendment. Or perhaps they don't like drinking and decides to give the 21st the ax while Congress is in recess? Due process is very important, in my opinion.

Agree. Even if an elected official skirts the constitution for something we may agree with, we should consider the precedent such action sets for the next person in office who may be very different.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
I do my best to avoid political discussions like one would avoid the plague. I also suspect this thread will degrade into political arguing based on party affiliation and if you are or are not a Trump supporter.

I am not taking a political side here and as for Trump, that is not the issue that is making me nervous.

It is this that has me concerned. And it is not because it is Trump and it is not that Trump is going to try and do it nor what he is trying to do as it applies to immigrants and birthrights

Trump eyeing executive order to end birthright citizenship, a move most legal experts say runs afoul of the Constitution

Think about this for a second, with you politically shaded glasses off.

If a sitting president, regardless of party affiliation, can get rid of an amendment to the constitution with an executive order then which one of the Amendments is next on the chopping block simply because the President does not think it is right or his political party wants him to eliminate that amendment.....Guns become illegal, slavery is back, unreasonable search and seizure, right to a fair trial, excessive fines and cruelty ok...all by executive order. I realize they do not pay as much attention to the Constitution as they should in good ole Washington DC (on both sides of the political coin) but to be able to negate an amendment to the Constitution...all with an executive order from the President...that makes me nervous and could potentially take this country places we simply do not want to go.

Now to wait and see if it is actually legal for him to do it

A list of amendments of the Constitution just think with the stroke of a pen, from 1 man or woman....they could be gone... that I hope, is not possible
All of which points to the fact that we have a narcissistic nut job for a President. Trump has no more power to change the Constitution on his own than you or I. And the way both houses are now constructed he'd never get it passed anyway.


In any case this asinine grandstanding is just more Trump Rhetoric created to fool his gullible followers because he's stupid enough to believe he has the power.


.
 
Last edited:

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
Right, I believe the issue isn't so much the topic (another discussion entirely), but the precedence it would set. Imagine if a Democrat decides to take the oval for a spin in a few years. They decide to unilaterally re-write the second amendment. Or perhaps they don't like drinking and decides to give the 21st the ax while Congress is in recess? Due process is very important, in my opinion.

You are correct and that is exactly what makes me nervous. President decides he likes the job to much after his 2 terms and does away with the 22nd amendment. Or that the 15th and 19th amendments were just wrong.... get the pen...write up an executive order and... poof...gone with the stroke of a pen...
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
You are correct and that is exactly what makes me nervous. President decides he likes the job to much after his 2 terms and does away with the 22nd amendment. Or that the 15th and 19th amendments were just wrong.... get the pen...write up an executive order and... poof...gone with the stroke of a pen...
This opens into another discussion worth having (maybe another time) about EO's at baseline. I hold they are too powerful and unilateral for my taste.
 

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
All of which points to the fact that we have a narcissistic nut job for a President. Trump has no more power to change the Constitution on his own than you or I. And the way both houses are now constructed he'd never get it passed anyway.

In any case this asinine grandstanding is just more Trump Rhetoric created to fool his gullible followers.

.

I suspect you are correct that the president does not have the power, but if he does then getting past both houses is not an issue, it is just a presidential signature. As for the rest I have no comment since I am attemping to keep this from degrading to that type discussion, although I have no doubt it will go that way sooner or later if it lasts long enough
 
Last edited:

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
This opens into another discussion worth having (maybe another time) about EO's at baseline. I hold they are too powerful and unilateral for my taste.

I tend to go with George Washington who felt political parties were not a good idea since people would vote for what's best for the party over what is best for the country.... which is pretty much what is going on now.

But to the topic. If an executive order can do it. Or if the "Constitutionality" of it is questionable...it will be interesting to see where this goes after the mid-term elections if the Republicans maintain the majority with a Supreme court stacked in their favor.

But don't get me wrong, I suspect the Democrat very capable of doing something similar if they were in this situation...they might just be after different amendments with the stroke of a pen
 
Last edited:

Nous

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Just moments before this thread was created I noted on another hearing Trump tout this. I would estimate there is about zero chance of any such EO, given that he does get lawyers to compose such orders. It kind of makes me want to throw up to realize that there is such an idiot, with such a childish mind, in the White House.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
I don't know enough about the details of this to make a solid judgment. But it may have something to do with the subject of "Anchor Babies", where a person comes here illegally with the intention of having a baby for the purpose of that child becoming an automatic citizen. If that is what this is about, I do not believe that someone who is here unlawfully and has a baby should expect that child to be an automatic U.S. citizen. If the parents are here lawfully and have a baby, I don't have a problem with that. Whether or not the president can do such a thing constitutionally? IDK. Will be interesting to see.

Well, the point is that the amendment to the Constitution specifically gives citizenship to such babies. That cannot be overruled by executive order by a president. It can only be overruled by changing the Constitution via an amendment.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
I suspect you are correct that the president does not have the power, but if he does then getting past both houses is not an issue, it is just a presidential signature. As for the rest I have no comment since I am attemping to keep this from degrading to that type discussion, although I have no doubt it will go that way sooner or later if it lasts long enough
Amending the Constitution (The ONLY way it can be changed)

Method 1: Congress Proposes an Amendment

An amendment to the Constitution may be proposed by any member of the House of Representatives or the Senate and will be considered under the standard legislative process in the form of a joint resolution. In addition, as ensured by the First Amendment, all American citizens are free to petition Congress or their state legislatures to amend the Constitution.

To be approved, the amending resolution must be passed by a two-thirds supermajority vote in both the House and the Senate. Given no official role in the amendment process by Article V, the President of the United States is not required to sign or otherwise approve the amending resolution. Presidents, however, typically express their opinion of proposed amendments and may attempt to persuade Congress to vote for or against them.


Method 2: The States Demand a Constitutional Convention

Under the second method of amending the Constitution prescribed by Article V, if two-thirds (currently 34) of the state legislatures vote to demand it, Congress is required to convene a full constitutional convention.

Just as in the Constitutional Convention of 1787, delegates from every state would attend this so-called “Article V Convention” for the purpose of proposing one or more amendments.
source

.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
I suspect you are correct that the president does not have the power, but if he does then getting past both houses is not an issue, it is just a presidential signature. As for the rest I have no comment since I am attemping to keep this from degrading to that type discussion, although I have no doubt it will go that way sooner or later if it lasts long enough

Well, the meaning of the Constitution is clear. So it isn't a matter of either the Presidency or the Congress, but of the courts. And, given that all of the potential actors took an oath to uphold the Constitution, the *only* way to overturn the law that babies born here are automatically US citizens is via an amendment to the Constitution. That also cannot be done by either Presidential fiat nor by the Congress alone.
 

GoodbyeDave

Well-Known Member
He doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting the courts to let him override the constitution. But I must say that I agree with him (OMG!) As an old saying goes, a dog may be born in a stable but that doesn't make it a horse.

The practice on confering citizenship by birth can have unexpected consequences. Australia has a silly rule that you can't sit in parliament if you hold dual nationality. Last year, one MP had to go when they realised that she'd been born in Canada while her father was working there!
 

David1967

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I tend to go with George Washington who felt political parties were not a good idea since people would vote for what's best for the party over what is best for the country.... which is pretty much what is going on now.

You are (sadly) correct. Both major parties are guilty of this. I remember as a child, my Grandparents voted straight party line no matter who was running. Granted, I don't remember people being as hostile toward one another over politics then.
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
I do my best to avoid political discussions like one would avoid the plague. I also suspect this thread will degrade into political arguing based on party affiliation and if you are or are not a Trump supporter.

I am not taking a political side here and as for Trump, that is not the issue that is making me nervous.

It is this that has me concerned. And it is not because it is Trump and it is not that Trump is going to try and do it nor what he is trying to do as it applies to immigrants and birthrights

Trump eyeing executive order to end birthright citizenship, a move most legal experts say runs afoul of the Constitution

Think about this for a second, with you politically shaded glasses off.

If a sitting president, regardless of party affiliation, can get rid of an amendment to the constitution with an executive order then which one of the Amendments is next on the chopping block simply because the President does not think it is right or his political party wants him to eliminate that amendment.....Guns become illegal, slavery is back, unreasonable search and seizure, right to a fair trial, excessive fines and cruelty ok...all by executive order. I realize they do not pay as much attention to the Constitution as they should in good ole Washington DC (on both sides of the political coin) but to be able to negate an amendment to the Constitution...all with an executive order from the President...that makes me nervous and could potentially take this country places we simply do not want to go.

Now to wait and see if it is actually legal for him to do it

A list of amendments of the Constitution just think with the stroke of a pen, from 1 man or woman....they could be gone... that I hope, is not possible

kind of makes you wonder what the person swore "to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Well, the meaning of the Constitution is clear.
Not really, which is why the justices are almost always divided when deciding cases.

So it isn't a matter of either the Presidency or the Congress, but of the courts.
This only applies to interpreting the Constitution, not to amending it; the issue the OP raises.

.
 
Last edited:
Top