The majority of Americans want to deport all illegal immigrants

pic.twitter.com/fn8EmqUCQz

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) July 4, 2025

historian said:

---

---

Assassin said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Federal judge Randolph Moss has ruled that President Trump's declaration of an invasion at the Southern border, which successfully reduced illegal crossings by 99.9%, was illegal and must be rescinded. The invasion, he says, must be allowed to resume. It turns out that even if… pic.twitter.com/zeVlFL1jlr

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) July 2, 2025

---

It's downright bizarre

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

---

Not applicable here, as the president's lawful actions are manifestly not lawful.what I want to hear

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

---

Not applicable here, as the president's actions are manifestly not lawful.

---

The best prison system in the world. pic.twitter.com/rxSyu2et2C

— Nayib Bukele (@nayibbukele) July 4, 2025

I investigated Alligator Alcatraz with President Trump

It’s the ‘deadliest’ jail in America: not because of the conditions inside, but because of the conditions outside

Surrounded by millions of gators & swampland, there is no escape —except deportation.

And that’s the point… pic.twitter.com/ntpC7613TA

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) July 4, 2025

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

I'm replying that until it actually happens, it's moot. He hasn't deported anyone under that rule. Your fanatical liberal buddy judges have seen to that, which I'm pretty sure he expected. Trump wanted this to go to SCOTUS. They've already ruled that the Federal Judges cant touch this. The rule was put in place for slaves after the Civil War, not for use for Anchor Babies. Your boys have misused it for too long

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

I'm replying that until it actually happens, it's moot. He hasn't deported anyone under that rule. Your fanatical liberal buddy judges have seen to that, which I'm pretty sure he expected. Trump wanted this to go to SCOTUS. They've already ruled that the Federal Judges cant touch this. The rule was put in place for slaves after the Civil War, not for use for Anchor Babies. Your boys have misused it for too long

---

What about losing your right to vote? Still no problem?

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

Uh, no, counsellor. Wrong again.

We were NOT taught that in the class about citizenship. US Dept of State official position (Reagan/Bush era) was that the Constitution was unclear on that question and that law was being enforced under expansive bureaucratic discretion = better to err on the side of extending citizenship to someone who might not be entitled to it than to risk denying it to anyone who was.

Trump is merely choosing to end that (longstanding bipartisan) discretion and force SCOTUS to rule on the question.

I anticipate possibly 4-5 votes against him. Conceivably even a sixth.


I think he is right on the law itself but center-conservatives will be leery of going along with him, more respectful of tradition and worrying about opening a can of endless denaturalization processes.

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

I'm replying that until it actually happens, it's moot. He hasn't deported anyone under that rule. Your fanatical liberal buddy judges have seen to that, which I'm pretty sure he expected. Trump wanted this to go to SCOTUS. They've already ruled that the Federal Judges cant touch this. The rule was put in place for slaves after the Civil War, not for use for Anchor Babies. Your boys have misused it for too long

---

What about losing your right to vote? Still no problem?

---

You're changing the argument. Stick to the subject

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

I'm replying that until it actually happens, it's moot. He hasn't deported anyone under that rule. Your fanatical liberal buddy judges have seen to that, which I'm pretty sure he expected. Trump wanted this to go to SCOTUS. They've already ruled that the Federal Judges cant touch this. The rule was put in place for slaves after the Civil War, not for use for Anchor Babies. Your boys have misused it for too long

---

What about losing your right to vote? Still no problem?

---

You're changing the argument. Stick to the subject

---

The subject is denial of citizenship by the president and whether it violates the Constitution. You say it doesn't unless and until you're deported. I just want to clarify that you're okay with losing the right to vote.

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

I'm replying that until it actually happens, it's moot. He hasn't deported anyone under that rule. Your fanatical liberal buddy judges have seen to that, which I'm pretty sure he expected. Trump wanted this to go to SCOTUS. They've already ruled that the Federal Judges cant touch this. The rule was put in place for slaves after the Civil War, not for use for Anchor Babies. Your boys have misused it for too long

---

What about losing your right to vote? Still no problem?

---

You're changing the argument. Stick to the subject

---

The subject is denial of citizenship by the president and whether it violates the Constitution. You say it doesn't unless and until you're deported. I just want to clarify that you're okay with losing the right to vote.

---

Well, the Liberal plan has always been to use Birthright Citizenship to anchor illegal alien parents to the voting districts, use them to increase to get the other illegal aliens full citizenship and increase the population rolls to take over the House permanently. They estimate at least 10 new Democrat seats

How very liberal of you.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

I'm replying that until it actually happens, it's moot. He hasn't deported anyone under that rule. Your fanatical liberal buddy judges have seen to that, which I'm pretty sure he expected. Trump wanted this to go to SCOTUS. They've already ruled that the Federal Judges cant touch this. The rule was put in place for slaves after the Civil War, not for use for Anchor Babies. Your boys have misused it for too long

---

What about losing your right to vote? Still no problem?

---

You're changing the argument. Stick to the subject

---

The subject is denial of citizenship by the president and whether it violates the Constitution. You say it doesn't unless and until you're deported. I just want to clarify that you're okay with losing the right to vote.

---

Well, the Liberal plan has always been to use Birthright Citizenship to anchor illegal alien parents to the voting districts, use them to increase to get the other illegal aliens full citizenship and increase the population rolls to take over the House permanently. They estimate at least 10 new Democrat seats

How very liberal of you.

---

Sounds like a lot of trouble when Biden could have just stripped citizenship from conservative voters and taken over that way. I guess there's nothing in the law or the Constitution that says otherwise?

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

I'm replying that until it actually happens, it's moot. He hasn't deported anyone under that rule. Your fanatical liberal buddy judges have seen to that, which I'm pretty sure he expected. Trump wanted this to go to SCOTUS. They've already ruled that the Federal Judges cant touch this. The rule was put in place for slaves after the Civil War, not for use for Anchor Babies. Your boys have misused it for too long

---

What about losing your right to vote? Still no problem?

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

I'm replying that until it actually happens, it's moot. He hasn't deported anyone under that rule. Your fanatical liberal buddy judges have seen to that, which I'm pretty sure he expected. Trump wanted this to go to SCOTUS. They've already ruled that the Federal Judges cant touch this. The rule was put in place for slaves after the Civil War, not for use for Anchor Babies. Your boys have misused it for too long

---

What about losing your right to vote? Still no problem?

---

You're changing the argument. Stick to the subject

---

The subject is denial of citizenship by the president and whether it violates the Constitution. You say it doesn't unless and until you're deported. I just want to clarify that you're okay with losing the right to vote.

---

Well, the Liberal plan has always been to use Birthright Citizenship to anchor illegal alien parents to the voting districts, use them to increase to get the other illegal aliens full citizenship and increase the population rolls to take over the House permanently. They estimate at least 10 new Democrat seats

How very liberal of you.

---

Sounds like a lot of trouble when Biden could have just stripped citizenship from conservative voters and taken over that way. I guess there's nothing in the law or the Constitution that says otherwise?

---

My argument is not only rational; it is happening right in front of us. Yours, on the other hand... well, not so much

---

gtownbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

I'm replying that until it actually happens, it's moot. He hasn't deported anyone under that rule. Your fanatical liberal buddy judges have seen to that, which I'm pretty sure he expected. Trump wanted this to go to SCOTUS. They've already ruled that the Federal Judges cant touch this. The rule was put in place for slaves after the Civil War, not for use for Anchor Babies. Your boys have misused it for too long

---

What about losing your right to vote? Still no problem?

---

The 14th Amendment was passed to give citizenship to emancipated slaves after the Civil War. It certainly was not for pregnant women at the end of their term to plan trips to the U.S. so they could have their baby in our country and thus become a citizen. Or for illegals breaking into the country to do the same. This amendment was not meant for the purpose it is used for now.

Is The Founders Intent For Birthright Citizenship Misunderstood? U.S. Constitution.net

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

I'm replying that until it actually happens, it's moot. He hasn't deported anyone under that rule. Your fanatical liberal buddy judges have seen to that, which I'm pretty sure he expected. Trump wanted this to go to SCOTUS. They've already ruled that the Federal Judges cant touch this. The rule was put in place for slaves after the Civil War, not for use for Anchor Babies. Your boys have misused it for too long

---

What about losing your right to vote? Still no problem?

---

You're changing the argument. Stick to the subject

---

The subject is denial of citizenship by the president and whether it violates the Constitution. You say it doesn't unless and until you're deported. I just want to clarify that you're okay with losing the right to vote.

---

Well, the Liberal plan has always been to use Birthright Citizenship to anchor illegal alien parents to the voting districts, use them to increase to get the other illegal aliens full citizenship and increase the population rolls to take over the House permanently. They estimate at least 10 new Democrat seats

How very liberal of you.

---

Sounds like a lot of trouble when Biden could have just stripped citizenship from conservative voters and taken over that way. I guess there's nothing in the law or the Constitution that says otherwise?

---

My argument is not only rational; it is happening right in front of us. Yours, on the other hand... well, not so much

---

It is happening, just not to you. Trump is denying the rights and privileges of citizenship to a group of people that you and he would rather not allow to vote.

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

I'm replying that until it actually happens, it's moot. He hasn't deported anyone under that rule. Your fanatical liberal buddy judges have seen to that, which I'm pretty sure he expected. Trump wanted this to go to SCOTUS. They've already ruled that the Federal Judges cant touch this. The rule was put in place for slaves after the Civil War, not for use for Anchor Babies. Your boys have misused it for too long

---

What about losing your right to vote? Still no problem?

---

You're changing the argument. Stick to the subject

---

The subject is denial of citizenship by the president and whether it violates the Constitution. You say it doesn't unless and until you're deported. I just want to clarify that you're okay with losing the right to vote.

---

Well, the Liberal plan has always been to use Birthright Citizenship to anchor illegal alien parents to the voting districts, use them to increase to get the other illegal aliens full citizenship and increase the population rolls to take over the House permanently. They estimate at least 10 new Democrat seats

How very liberal of you.

---

Sounds like a lot of trouble when Biden could have just stripped citizenship from conservative voters and taken over that way. I guess there's nothing in the law or the Constitution that says otherwise?

---

My argument is not only rational; it is happening right in front of us. Yours, on the other hand... well, not so much

---

It is happening, just not to you. Trump is denying the rights and privileges of citizenship to a group of people that you and he would rather not allow to vote.

---

Actually, he issued an EO that he expected to go before SCOTUS to decide. The Executive Order 14156: "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship," aimed at ending birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. whose parents are in the country unlawfully or on temporary visas. How the constitutional amendment that liberals are using was designated for Civil War slaves post-conflict. At no time was it ever meant to be abused like this by leftists, simply to change the political arena forever. Again, are you a leftist?

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

I'm replying that until it actually happens, it's moot. He hasn't deported anyone under that rule. Your fanatical liberal buddy judges have seen to that, which I'm pretty sure he expected. Trump wanted this to go to SCOTUS. They've already ruled that the Federal Judges cant touch this. The rule was put in place for slaves after the Civil War, not for use for Anchor Babies. Your boys have misused it for too long

---

What about losing your right to vote? Still no problem?

---

You're changing the argument. Stick to the subject

---

The subject is denial of citizenship by the president and whether it violates the Constitution. You say it doesn't unless and until you're deported. I just want to clarify that you're okay with losing the right to vote.

---

Well, the Liberal plan has always been to use Birthright Citizenship to anchor illegal alien parents to the voting districts, use them to increase to get the other illegal aliens full citizenship and increase the population rolls to take over the House permanently. They estimate at least 10 new Democrat seats

How very liberal of you.

---

Sounds like a lot of trouble when Biden could have just stripped citizenship from conservative voters and taken over that way. I guess there's nothing in the law or the Constitution that says otherwise?

---

My argument is not only rational; it is happening right in front of us. Yours, on the other hand... well, not so much

---

It is happening, just not to you. Trump is denying the rights and privileges of citizenship to a group of people that you and he would rather not allow to vote.

---

Actually, he issued an EO that he expected to go before SCOTUS to decide. The Executive Order 14156: "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship," aimed at ending birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. whose parents are in the country unlawfully or on temporary visas. How the constitutional amendment that liberals are using was designated for Civil War slaves post-conflict. At no time was it ever meant to be abused like this by leftists, simply to change the political arena forever. Again, are you a leftist?

---

You're arguing with precedent that existed before most Americans had even heard of leftism, much less seen a leftist Supreme Court.

If Trump expects the Court to take up this issue, either he's naive or the conservative justices are way more in the tank than even their harshest critics believe.

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

The president is most definitely following the law, especially the constitution. It's the rogue judges who are violating the law and the constitution in a coup attempt. According to the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the land", one could reasonably argue that what they are doing is treason.

---

He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship.

---

I don't think he has deported anyone under Birthright Citizenship according to Reuters. So he hasn't violated the Constitution if this is accurate. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-lawyer-says-no-immediate-deportations-under-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-06-30/

---

That's beside the point. Denying citizenship violates the Constitution whether or not the person is deported.

---

That's just silly Sam. If no one has been deported, he hasn't violated the Constitution. Your words, not mine
"He's violating the Constitution in particular by refusing to recognize birthright citizenship."

---

So if the president signs an order taking away your citizenship, that is constitutional as far as you're concerned?

---

He knows it will go before the Supreme Court. They will interpret the Constitution, not you. Your record is not good on it.

---

If you're talking about birthright citizenship, the Court decided that issue a long time ago. But that's not what I asked you. Are you saying the president could take away your citizenship and it would be constitutional as long as you weren't deported?

---

I'm replying that until it actually happens, it's moot. He hasn't deported anyone under that rule. Your fanatical liberal buddy judges have seen to that, which I'm pretty sure he expected. Trump wanted this to go to SCOTUS. They've already ruled that the Federal Judges cant touch this. The rule was put in place for slaves after the Civil War, not for use for Anchor Babies. Your boys have misused it for too long

---

What about losing your right to vote? Still no problem?

---

You're changing the argument. Stick to the subject

---

The subject is denial of citizenship by the president and whether it violates the Constitution. You say it doesn't unless and until you're deported. I just want to clarify that you're okay with losing the right to vote.

---

Well, the Liberal plan has always been to use Birthright Citizenship to anchor illegal alien parents to the voting districts, use them to increase to get the other illegal aliens full citizenship and increase the population rolls to take over the House permanently. They estimate at least 10 new Democrat seats

How very liberal of you.

---

Sounds like a lot of trouble when Biden could have just stripped citizenship from conservative voters and taken over that way. I guess there's nothing in the law or the Constitution that says otherwise?

---

My argument is not only rational; it is happening right in front of us. Yours, on the other hand... well, not so much

---

It is happening, just not to you. Trump is denying the rights and privileges of citizenship to a group of people that you and he would rather not allow to vote.

---

Actually, he issued an EO that he expected to go before SCOTUS to decide. The Executive Order 14156: "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship," aimed at ending birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. whose parents are in the country unlawfully or on temporary visas. How the constitutional amendment that liberals are using was designated for Civil War slaves post-conflict. At no time was it ever meant to be abused like this by leftists, simply to change the political arena forever. Again, are you a leftist?

---

You're arguing with precedent that existed before most Americans had even heard of leftism, much less seen a leftist Supreme Court.

If Trump expects the Court to take up this issue, either he's naive or the conservative justices are way more in the tank than even their harshest critics believe.

---

Never in the history of our country has there been an illegal alien invasion like we have seen in the previous four years. Your party of choice has made it an issue

---