The Supreme Court effectively blocked the judiciary’s ability to stop Trump from implementing a huge range of policies.
  • WatDabney@fedia.io
    0·
    2 months ago

    So literally what happened here is Trump said, “I want to violate the Constitution” and the Supreme Court said, " Okay — go ahead."

    And that’s it for the rule of law in the US.

    All that’s left now is to tally the mass murders along the way to the inevitable collapse of the US, and to hope that our descendents can build something better out of the rubble.

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    0·
    1 month ago

    Human rights are officially a thing of the past. None of us qualify for citizenship if he removes that definition.

    • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
      0·
      1 month ago

      Birthright citizenship is not a human right. It’s pretty much only a thing in North and South America.

      You can say a lot of things. But proclaiming it as a loss of human rights is not it.

      • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
        0·
        1 month ago

        You’re arguing that people don’t have the right to live where they were born and have lived their entire lives.
        If that’s not a human right, than basically nothing is.

        Also, “only” north and south america? That’s not a trivial portion of the world that you can just “only” away.

        • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
          0·
          1 month ago

          I’m not arguing anything. I’m informing you of what the reality is.

          33 countries have it. All but two are in Americas.

          The rest have citizenship inherited from your parents. Meaning. Even if I was born in Portugal. It wouldn’t make me a Portugeese citizen. I would still be a Swedish citizen. Since my parents are.

          • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
            0·
            1 month ago

            “I’m not arguing anything” they say, arguing that it’s not a human right.

            Get the fuck out of here with your double think.
            Portugal and Sweden not respecting a human right doesn’t make it not a human right. Given how gleefully so much of Europe seems to be to deny people who have lived in the country for generations citizenship, to restrict their freedom or religion, or to just watch them fucking drown, I’m not super keen for the US to use Europe as a role model for human rights regarding citizenship.

            Again, if taking someone from the only home they’ve ever known to live someplace they’ve never been, don’t speak the language, and have no citizenship isn’t a human rights violation, then nothing that matters is.
            I don’t give a shit if Sweden says it’s fine.

  • merc@sh.itjust.works
    0·
    2 months ago

    If you end birthright citizenship, then nobody gets to be a citizen by birth. If you can’t be a citizen by birth, the only way to become a citizen is naturalization. If the only citizens are naturalized people, the country is 100% immigrants.

    • j0ester@lemmy.world
      0·
      1 month ago

      This was initially what was Donald’s EO and such, but blue states (of course) noticed he fucked up (imagine having so much money and you can’t have a better team looking over your shit), that they had to change it.

      Now it states that parents in the US legally can have a kid and it will be a citizen. But not parents who’s here visiting and such. But what if a mom is an illegal and dad is legal? What would the kid be?