BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP BAN FOR ILLEGALS AND TEMPORARY VISA JEETS ENDS JULY 27th! - /pol/ (#509981690) [Archived: 521 hours ago]

Anonymous ID: Bk++HV3gUnited States
7/10/2025, 5:54:54 AM No.509981690
3200720255353
3200720255353
md5: 1894e687d1ffb2ea6692fa288517af9d🔍
BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP ORDER GOES INTO EFFECT JULY 27TH!

BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP ENDS IN THE FOLLOWING STATES JULY 27th: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire*, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

>B-B-But the shitskins can just shit out a mutant in Caliwali and then move to Idaho!
WRONG, the EO states that Idaho will NOT recognize the birth certificate granted in California and your child will still be an ILLEGAL, STATELESS, WITHOUT CITIZENSHIP.

>Trumps Executive Order is as follows:
“policy of the United States” to no longer ISSUE or ACCEPT documentation of citizenship in two scenarios: “(1) when [a] person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when [a] person’s mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.”

>B-B-B-But this doesn't apply retroactively.
That is what the SCOTUS case in October is for, SCOTUS rulings on Constitutional Interpretations and Questions (In this case the interpretation of Clause 1 of the 14th Amendment) are RETROACTIVE going back to the date the Amendment was ratified which in this case would be July 9th, 1868.

PS: This also applies to H1B Jeets.
Thank you for your attention to this matter!

* = Pending A Legal Case that might remove it from the list.

https://www.wcax.com/video/2025/07/10/new-hampshire-court-hear-arguments-over-birthright-citizenship-ban/
Replies: >>509982004 >>509982875 >>509983797 >>509984193
Anonymous ID: CV5EcX0fCanada
7/10/2025, 6:01:06 AM No.509982004
>>509981690 (OP)
>Trump closes Epstein case
>ZOG immediately let’s him establish the third Reich in return
Replies: >>509982183 >>509983985
Anonymous ID: Bk++HV3gUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:03:01 AM No.509982093
28 states ending birthright citizenship for illegals and temporary visa holders
IF YOUR STATE HAS A RED "X" THEN THE BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP BAN GOES INTO EFFECT IN YOUR STATE STARTING JULY 27th!
Replies: >>509982326 >>509983797
Anonymous ID: I6S7SohEUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:04:53 AM No.509982183
>>509982004
bit of a stretch
Anonymous ID: 5o4t2+nRUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:08:02 AM No.509982326
1728421274101224_thumb.jpg
1728421274101224_thumb.jpg
md5: 38bb41dc9b9d05b30a6cb31f0614f758🔍
>>509982093
why is the EO unable to cover all 50 states?
Replies: >>509982467
Anonymous ID: Bk++HV3gUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:10:49 AM No.509982467
>>509982326
Because in 22 states there are Injunctions placed on a state level, 3 of those injunctions were placed on a UNIVERSAL/NATIONWIDE level but on June 27th, 2025 SCOTUS ruled that federal judges could not place NATIONWIDE INJUNCTIONS so those injunctions are now Statewide instead of Nationwide or even more narrowly only applicable to the plaintiffs who are suing the federal government... anyways that is why it applies to 28 out of 50 states because 22 of them are suing the federal government and until those cases go through the courts or SCOTUS makes another ruling on the MERITS of the EO then it stays in this sort of limbo where 28 states the EO goes into effect and 22 states it doesnt.
Replies: >>509982763
Anonymous ID: 5o4t2+nRUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:16:57 AM No.509982763
1721688688185843
1721688688185843
md5: 09620e6ba93a4a5dafd92c499ec77820🔍
>>509982467
if SCOTUS wouldn't allow the illegal immigrant checkbox question on the census, i assume they will not act against birthright citizenship.
so Congress will likely have to pass a law then?
Replies: >>509982850
Anonymous ID: Bk++HV3gUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:18:46 AM No.509982850
>>509982763
SCOTUS already has it on their docket for October so the EO goes into effect in 28 states until late October.

That decision in October will be the biggest SCOTUS decision in US History and that is not even close to being an understatement.
Replies: >>509983005
Anonymous ID: E2eEZqRcUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:19:01 AM No.509982875
>>509981690 (OP)


> and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth


Why the fuck does this EO give citizenship to children of green card foreigner immigrants who aren't even naturalized
Replies: >>509982947
Anonymous ID: Bk++HV3gUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:20:25 AM No.509982947
>>509982875
Because that is Supreme Court precedent in Wong Kim Ark that Lawful Permanent Residents are considered to be "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" the United States and thus are protected under the 14th Amendment.

Green Card Holders make up <20% of all migrants in the US though.
Anonymous ID: 5o4t2+nRUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:21:30 AM No.509983005
1739014481485957_thumb.jpg
1739014481485957_thumb.jpg
md5: 261c439d87c333e9a539ac5b1004dcc5🔍
>>509982850
lol you know ACB is going to fail us, don't kid yourself
Replies: >>509983203
Anonymous ID: Bk++HV3gUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:25:01 AM No.509983203
>>509983005
It was ACB who wrote the majority opinion that allowed the EO to go into effect in the first place.
Replies: >>509983608
Anonymous ID: 5o4t2+nRUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:33:09 AM No.509983608
>>509983203
that misguided catholic midwit will not do anything to slow down the growth of the Pope's army of hispanics
Replies: >>509983694
Anonymous ID: Bk++HV3gUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:34:58 AM No.509983694
>>509983608
ACB will vote in favor of banning Birthright Citizenship for illegals and temp. visa jeets.

Here is a brilliant breakdown of ACBs majority opinion from June 27th:
Barrett limited the court’s review to the sole question of whether, under the Judiciary Act of 1789, federal courts have the authority to issue nationwide, or “universal,” injunctions.

The act was one of the first laws passed by Congress after the ratification of the Constitution, and in modified form remains on the books in Title 28 of the United States Code. And as Barrett noted, it is the Judiciary Act that has endowed federal courts with jurisdiction over “all suits … in equity,” and that “still today … authorizes the federal courts to issue equitable remedies,” such as injunctions.

As an originalist, Barrett interprets the Constitution and federal statutes rigidly according to their text and their “original public meaning,” discounting evolving legal norms and practices as well as contemporary social values and needs. When it comes to universal injunctions, however, originalists have a problem. No federal statute, including the Judiciary Act, explicitly authorizes judges to issue nationwide injunctions, but no statute prohibits them from doing so.

In the absence of any guidance from the 1789 act, Barrett and the majority revved up their originalist wayback machine to examine how the English High Court of Chancery operated at the time of the founding, asking if that court issued forms of equitable relief analogous to contemporary universal injunctions. “The answer,” she wrote, “is no.” Equitable remedies at the time of the founding, she concluded, could provide “complete relief between the parties” to a lawsuit, but “complete relief is not synonymous with universal relief” that applies throughout an entire country.
Anonymous ID: KQWDa6kyUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:36:55 AM No.509983797
>>509981690 (OP)
>>509982093
>tfw i live in a liberal spic shithole
nothing ever happens
Anonymous ID: 6tARqxklUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:40:54 AM No.509983985
>>509982004
>He's totally not retracting for industries that abuse wages, and increasing LEGAL immigration. He's totally getting the blackmail to work in his favor while providing weapons to Ukraine and bombing Isfaek's enemies.
Puppet gonna puppet. The Epstein situation is by far more important than even mass deportations because it's all just a show until Americans have representatives again.
Replies: >>509984143
Anonymous ID: Bk++HV3gUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:43:53 AM No.509984143
>>509983985
>the browning of your country doesn't matter
>mass deportations don't matter
SHALOM!
Anonymous ID: 2K+3r1qKUnited States
7/10/2025, 6:44:41 AM No.509984193
>>509981690 (OP)
Trump needs to fly in thousands of pregnant Russians and see what those on the left say when their children are now US citizens.
Replies: >>509985984
Anonymous ID: Bk++HV3gUnited States
7/10/2025, 7:21:27 AM No.509985984
>>509984193
Shitlibs would lose their minds, maybe throw in some North Koreans and maybe get Xi Jinpings daughter pregnant and pop out of a citizen in Washington DC.
Anonymous ID: Bk++HV3gUnited States
7/10/2025, 7:55:24 AM No.509987496
bump