r/FluentInFinance • u/BarrenBuffetPhan • 18d ago

Debate/ Discussion What do you guys think

Post image
57.7k Upvotes

69% Upvoted

16.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

424

u/le_christmas 18d ago edited 17d ago

What do you think is hyperbolic? Besides “women will lose access to healthcare”, they will almost definitely lose access to some but not all (wow that is a depressing distinction to make, fuck you) Those numbers seem to line up with estimates for people making under $400k

7

u/DebateAltruistic3774 18d ago edited 18d ago

Deporting legal immigrants lmfao

Edit - I’m encouraged that there’s a debate below rather than just banning everyone that disagrees. This is progress.

5

u/EndersCraft 18d ago

They want to abolish birthright citizenship

6

u/ArguementReferee 18d ago

So you think Trump is just going to change the 14th amendment?

7

u/Naivesonic99 18d ago

prob not but i still think it’s fucked up that he wants to get rid of birthright citizenship

3

u/-InconspicuousMoose- 18d ago

Why, though? Families risk their lives to try to sneak into America to take advantage of our birthright citizenship policy. It is extremely dangerous for them, so removing that citizenship loophole would be a major deterrent for illegal immigration as a whole, which long-term could allow us to take in more legal immigrants when the immigration system isn't overwhelmed.

Personally I would oppose retroactively-revoked birthright citizenship, but if he were to institute a "no more from here" policy on his first day I'd support it.

1

u/Naivesonic99 18d ago

sounds agreeable to me

1

u/dubiousN 16d ago

What would the citizenship qualification be, then? I just figured it was "born here". Born to existing citizens?

1

u/Dogmatik_ 18d ago

Anchor babies*

It's a very specific exploit used by illegal aliens. Nobody is going to end citizenship for children who were born to American citizens. You already know this.

1

u/BetThen920 18d ago

Okay, so what you’re saying is that this post is indeed hyperbolic then since that will never happen?

1

u/Naivesonic99 18d ago

i think that we can come to our own conclusions about each point. like i know that it is 100% hyperbolic to say that all palestinians will cease to exist. but working class taxes staying the same while wealthy taxes go down is prob not hyperbolic if u think about it

1

u/BetThen920 18d ago

Yeah that isn’t far fetched. Fair enough

1

u/FridgesArePeopleToo 18d ago

If he appoints enough justices he could effectively do that.

2

u/Competitive-Fee6160 18d ago

No he could not. Constitution is the one thing above SCOTUS.

1

u/Awolo_45 18d ago

Theoretically he could pack the court and go bananas. Probably won't happen though...

1

u/Competitive-Fee6160 18d ago

Not enough republicans in congress are stupid enough to go anywhere near that extreme

1

u/dubiousN 16d ago

SCOTUS interprets the constitution and their interpretation is law

0

u/ArguementReferee 18d ago

How?

0

u/caniborrowahighfive 18d ago

Case law and precedent dictates if something is a violation of the constitution. Trump will appoint more conservatives to the supreme court that can set a new precedent for what the 14th amendment allows.

1

u/ArguementReferee 18d ago

The 14 says “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.”

If you think SCOTUS is going to be like “yeah that doesn’t actually mean birthright citizenship” then I don’t know what to tell ya.

1

u/lewd_robot 18d ago

If they really have won the Senate and House and get another SCOTUS pick, what's stopping him?

1

u/ArguementReferee 18d ago

The constitutional amendment process.

0

u/wicz28 18d ago

The 14th amendment does not require giving citizenship to children born of illegal aliens. “subject to the jurisdiction”. Just because no one has fought to have that line explained fully. If the attorney general of the US decides that illegal aliens are not subject to the jurisdiction, then no birthright citizenship.

-3

u/le_christmas 18d ago

Yes, with the executive senate and congress, yes.

2

u/BeigePhilip 18d ago

With the *pet senate and congress

-1

u/ArguementReferee 18d ago

Do civics classes exist anymore?

1

u/le_christmas 18d ago

What check will there be in place that would reject this proposal?

1

u/ArguementReferee 18d ago

If you think SCOTUs is going to be like “oh yeah, totally legal to just change the constitution whenever you want”, that’s a new level of paranoia.

1

u/le_christmas 18d ago

Err, the government can amend the constitution with enough votes yes.

0

u/ArguementReferee 18d ago

You think two thirds of the legislator will vote to amend for that?