Day One

[Suppressed Poet]

Where did you get that idea?

As you can see in the chart below from the BBC, Obama issued fewer EOs than any recent two-term President. During Obama's first term, he issued fewer EOs than any recent President during the President's first term, including Trump. In fact, the truth is the exact opposite of what you said. Obama was the most conservative President in the use of EOs. During his first term, Trump was the least conservative in the use of EOs.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-69606315

He called them “presidential memorandum” which is simply EO by another name. When you include those, the number is much higher.

Your attempts to rewrite history for your narrative have failed.

[Methais]

He called them “presidential memorandum” which is simply EO by another name. When you include those, the number is much higher.

Your attempts to rewrite history for your narrative have failed.

You can add another 644 to Obama's list, making the total 920.

List of presidential memoranda by Barack Obama




Why you always have to be so full of shit ClydeRetard?

[Suppressed Poet]

I guess it was 10+ years ago, but ClydeR seems to forget Obama throwing a fit when Democrats didn’t have complete control of Congress. After that happened, he used the power of executive actions to bypass the legislative process (with some directives being blatantly extrajudicial). This set a new precedent and opened Pandora’s Box. Since then both Trump & Biden both have been trigger happy with executive orders, memorandums, and directives.

Obama publicly addressing criticism about taking executive action when Congress doesn’t go his way:

[Tgo01]

and subject to the jurisdiction thereof

I think this is the part Trump is going to focus on. Are people who are in the US illegally subject to the jurisdiction of the US, and if not, does that mean their children are subject to the jurisdiction of the US?

Children of diplomats born in the US aren't granted citizenship.

[Gelston]

I think this is the part Trump is going to focus on. Are people who are in the US illegally subject to the jurisdiction of the US, and if not, does that mean their children are subject to the jurisdiction of the US?

Children of diplomats born in the US aren't granted citizenship.

That means they are subject to the laws of that state, which is what jurisdiction means. Unless you think illegal aliens can freely commit murder or whatever with no recourse through the law?

[Tgo01]

That means they are subject to the laws of that state, which is what jurisdiction means. Unless you think illegal aliens can freely commit murder or whatever with no recourse through the law?

Or maybe the argument will be the child won't be subject to the jurisdiction of the US. I don't know exactly what they are going to argue in court, but I'm sure that is the line in the amendment they will be focusing on.

If they aren't going to argue that then yes, this executive order was just for show because that's the only part of the amendment that has any wiggle room.

Also if they are going to argue that the parents aren't subject to the jurisdiction of the US, then I suppose the recourse would be to deport them and demand that their home country try them for the crime, although that would require their home countries be willing to accept them back in the first place, much less to then try them.

[Gelston]

Or maybe the argument will be the child won't be subject to the jurisdiction of the US. I don't know exactly what they are going to argue in court, but I'm sure that is the line in the amendment they will be focusing on.

If they aren't going to argue that then yes, this executive order was just for show because that's the only part of the amendment that has any wiggle room.

Also if they are going to argue that the parents aren't subject to the jurisdiction of the US, then I suppose the recourse would be to deport them and demand that their home country try them for the crime, although that would require their home countries be willing to accept them back in the first place, much less to then try them.

If you are within the state, you're in that state's Jurisdiction, regardless of your immigration status. There is nothing to argue about there, that is literally what jurisdiction mean, the place that states or other entities' laws cover. It isn't a vague word.

[Tgo01]

In the case of diplomats the federal government has already shown they can declare certain people aren't subject to the jurisdiction of federal or state laws.

This is from Trump's order itself, apparently this is what they are going to argue in court:

"Among the categories of individuals born in the United States and not subject to the jurisdiction thereof, the privilege of United States citizenship does not automatically extend to persons born in the United States: (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States at the time of said person’s birth was lawful but temporary (such as, but not limited to, visiting the United States under the auspices of the Visa Waiver Program or visiting on a student, work, or tourist visa) and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth."

So they aren't going to argue that the parents aren't subject to the jurisdiction of the US, but that children born to people in the US illegally or legally but temporarily aren't subject to the jurisdiction of the US.

[Gelston]

In the case of diplomats the federal government has already shown they can declare certain people aren't subject to the jurisdiction of federal or state laws.

This is from Trump's order itself, apparently this is what they are going to argue in court:



So they aren't going to argue that the parents aren't subject to the jurisdiction of the US, but that children born to people in the US illegally or legally but temporarily aren't subject to the jurisdiction of the US.

Yes, they have diplomatic immunity. An illegal alien doesn't have diplomatic immunity and are do not fall under the jurisdiction of the states in which they are residing.

As for Trump's lines, that doesn't matter. Once that child is born, he is subject to the laws and protections of the Jurisdiction in which he inhabits.


But, I think most sane people agree this EO won't survive court. Even Trump doesn't believe it will.

[Suppressed Poet]

That means they are subject to the laws of that state, which is what jurisdiction means. Unless you think illegal aliens can freely commit murder or whatever with no recourse through the law?

I mean, if said murder happens on the NYC subway…maybe…?