this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2025
75 points (100.0% liked)

politics

24370 readers
3238 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Trump administration wants to end automatic birthright citizenship as enshrined in the Constitution’s 14th Amendment.

The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Trump administration to take steps to implement its proposal to end automatic birthright citizenship, handing a major win to the government.

The court granted a request by the Trump administration to narrow the scope of nationwide injunctions imposed by judges so that they apply only to states, groups and individuals that sued. That means the birthright citizenship proposal can likely move forward at least in part in the states that challenged it as well as those that did not.

The court was divided on ideological lines, with conservatives in the majority and liberals in dissent.

top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 11 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

In a nutshell, and none of this is hyperbole:

  • Birthright citizenship is no longer a thing, despite it literally being a constitutional amendment.
  • Constitutional amendments, for that matter, can be once again just hand-waved away the minute they become inconvenient for the ruling party.
  • Judges no longer can do anything to stop the Trump administration from violating your rights (Unless you have a shitload of cash and can win the race to the courthouse).

I want everybody to let it settle in for a second. If you thought the Presidential Immunity ruling was bad, Trump was just told that he can now literally do whatever the hell he wants, Constitution be damned, and even judges don't have the authority to stop him. What the fuck do you think he's going to do with that kind of power?

The Supreme Court said that Trump can do what he wants. Then Congress said Trump can do what he wants. Our pillars of society, who for literal centuries said that they would be there to stand up to tyranny in all its forms, then literally crumbled at Trump's feet at the first sign of pressure. Then the Supreme Court once again stepped in and said that not only will they not stand up to Trump, they'll make sure that no other judge in the country has the power to either.

Our democracy has fallen. There will be no rebellion. The shift to authoritarianism was welcomed with open arms by the votes of almost 80 million of our own citizens, the apathy of tens of millions more, and the unwillingness of our society to stand their ground.

The strength and resiliency of modern Democracy in the US has been shown to be nothing more than a paper tiger that can be defeated by even the slightest breeze.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

Well, at least "Genocide Joe" or "Kamala the Cop" won't be killing Gazans.

....oh wait.

Anyway, I have yet to see some of the more strident both-sidering "leftists" apologize for anything they've said or done in the run-up to last fall's election. I'm sure their sense of smug self-satisfaction will be a huge comfort to them as they are being shoved onto trains, er planes, destined to shithole countries that have signed up to outsource the gulags...because, well, "both sides" and "argle bargle something something the status quo".

[–] Anomalocaris@lemm.ee 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

small legal question. does that mean that the US constitution is now secondary to federal policy?

and therefore would it be hyperbole to say that rule of law is gone?

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 2 points 34 minutes ago

It's worse than that.

This is, I believe, the fourth or fifth amendment to the Constitution that has been hand-waved away once it became inconvenient. Birthright citizenship is no longer a thing. Due Process is no longer a thing. Insurrectionists can run for President. Freedom of the Press can be invalidated by executive order. The US Constitution isn't even secondary to federal policy. It's been successfully relegated to a really old piece of paper with some guidelines that can be ignored at will. Our elected officials have made the repeated and affirmative decision to not enforce or defend the Constitution of the United States, and our Supreme Court has given them their blessing to do just that. With nobody willing or able to enforce, uphold, and defend the Constitution, it has all the practical legal weight of a Dr. Seuss book.

And yes, the rule of law is long gone. It's been replaced with Trump's Supreme-Court-Endorsed policy of "I'll do what I want, because fuck you that's why.". Stephen Miller literally said as much when he told California's governor that "You have no say in this. Federal law will be enforced", and openly dared him to do something about it.

[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 42 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

Isn't this, like, catastrophic? Now, the government can basically do whatever it wants to people who don't have the resources to challenge it in court themselves, or live in a state that will do it on their behalf.

[–] thedruid@lemmy.world 15 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Yes. It is over. Democracy has fallen. Do with that as you will

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 5 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Eh, close, but that's still theoretically barely viable until the administration takes the affirmative step of saying "everybody in Denver can't vote but Rifle's cool", at which point anybody in Denver who can't get a lawyer and a court date is probably screwed,

So, yeah I guess the difference between rule of law being down for the count and democracy going into hibernation might be entirely semantic in practice

Do with that as you will

I'm going to believe a lot of people are about to realize what a bad idea this all is and keep telling people what a bad idea this all is and eventually live in a better world or get dumped in a mass grave for running my mouth. Good luck everybody.

[–] thedruid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

I'll end up in that same dump im Sure..

Looks like a good day....

[–] SnarkoPolo@lemmy.world 5 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (3 children)

Want to hear something that would be a hoot if it weren't so depressing?

I asked ChatGPT "with no more birthright citizenship, how can i prove that I'm an American?" IT COULDN'T ANSWER. That's the first time I've ever seen that, and I use it a lot for work.

[–] arrow74@lemm.ee 1 points 41 minutes ago

My best guess is you'll now need to have your parents and maybe even grandparents birth certificates if they were US citizens. That would be solid proof. If you get to see a judge

Someone in this admin will try to say, "Both of your parents were born here... but their parents were here illegally so none of your citizenship counts."

[–] thedruid@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

I get it a lot with political questions.

[–] SnarkoPolo@lemmy.world 32 points 5 hours ago

So none of us will be able to prove that we're citizens. How convenient for the Ruling Party.

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 15 points 4 hours ago

No birthright citizenship in a country founded and inhabited almost entirely by immigrants, with no mandatory national ID? Yeah that's gonna be a shitshow and a half.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 16 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

More bad behavior from the Roberts Supreme Court. Write it down, Democrats.

I'm just going to keep putting "bad behavior / bad behaviour" in the thread of each new piece of SCOTUS' deliberate ignorance of democracy, constitution and the rule of law. You'll be able to search my profile for it, and maybe Democrats can do something about it if they can retake power.

[–] SnarkoPolo@lemmy.world 7 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

How optimistic you are, to assume that the token opposition party will EVER have any power, ever again.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 hours ago

It's also a very bold assumption of mine that they would try to do anything more than the status quo even if they did manage to retake power, predicated on the Democratic Party being massively reformed. If there was ever a time to reform the Dems, that's right now, years before midterms or a US general election.

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago

And that you know, they'll see this person profile in a niche social network.

[–] ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 21 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Uh oh... Clarence Thomas just got a new luxury RV for free! Thanks Harlan!

[–] simplejack@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)
[–] ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

He can't. He has to vote for unconstitutional Trump shit to return the favors.

[–] simplejack@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago

So John Oliver wasn’t his only RV suitor?