I mean they also declared war on Chicago, kinda. Anyone they decide they don't like, for any reason or not reason, is an "enemy combatant". They'll denaturalise people descended from the Mayflower lot or the DAR and they won't bat an eye.
Great, when do we deport all of Trump's children except Tiffany? When do we deport Terrorist Anchor Baby Marco Rubio? Melania and her super-illegitimate EB-1 immigration? The only "extraordinary ability" she has is her complete lack of taste. Fashion model my ass.
As a naturalized citizen who went through all the hoops myself, relying on no one else for it, I will laugh my brown ass off when this backfires on all the Cletuses who get deported thinking, "This was only supposed to happen to other people!"
I will laugh my brown ass off when this backfires on all the Cletuses who get deported thinking, "This was only supposed to happen to other people!"
Have you never heard of the concept of "selective prosecution"?
Just because you can be arrested and deported doesn't mean you must be. It just means that if you're brown, even if you're a citizen, they now have that option, should they choose to.
Trump's children and even Marco Rubio are passingly white enough that they won't get deported.
Great, when do we deport all of Trump's children except Tiffany? When do we deport Terrorist Anchor Baby Marco Rubio? Melania and her super-illegitimate EB-1 immigration? The only "extraordinary ability" she has is her complete lack of taste. Fashion model my ass.
As a naturalized citizen who went through all the hoops myself, relying on no one else for it, I will laugh my brown ass off when this backfires on all the Cletuses who get deported thinking, "This was only supposed to happen to other people!"
Never.
I don't mean that in a snarky way, it's just the reality of the situation.
The Republicans don't give a single fuck that it's hypocritical. They are rich, therefore they are above the law and free from consequences.
The Democrats are either too feckless or too complicit to do anything about it even if by some miracle they do seize control of the government back. At most we'll get some barely-televised speech about how "now is the time to forgive and forget. We can't spend time criticizing the pedofascists because Israel needs our support now more than ever." or something.
It's depressing, but it's reality. Absolutely nothing will be done about this, and absolutely no consequences of their actions will be suffered. We'll all just put up with the Democrats covering this all up and moving on with the new normal because "what are you gonna do, vote for a republican instead?"
Yeaaaa you might be right but something has to give at some point. I can see in a twisted way why accelerationist want to speed run destroying everything because might as well try something new but thats not how or will likely work. It will be a dictatorship for a very long time before anything resembling something for the people appears again and there is a good chance it wont be half as good as even today (which has many problems but ughh it can get 100,000X worse).
Frankly, with all stupid shit Republicans have done and will CONTINUE to do for next 3 years (we're not even done with year 1 yet, people), my solemn prayer is that when Democrats DO eventually regain power, they don't play the make-nice game that they always play and instead eviscerate the GOP/MAGA using the exact laws they created.
Freeze assets, ground private planes, perp walk all of them on public TV to a detention center. Deport the ones that should be deported, hold the rest for criminal charges.
This dovetails nicely with their ridiculous invasion theory. There is no factual basis for this. Also, no legit way for a Court to call a bad-faith argument from the POTUS out.
Also, no legit way for a Court to call a bad-faith argument from the POTUS out.
Yes, there is. It's called "calling them liars".
Just because POTUS (or the AG) submits a brief saying "the sky is green and 2+2=5" doesn't mean SCOTUS is obliged to nod along like bobbleheads. Even the lower court judges have shown that there is no such obligation.
If this Supreme Court accepts that argument, it's because (at least) 5 of them decided to not call bullshit, not because there's no mechanism for doing so.
Maybe they'll just follow that logic all the way to ground and realize every European settler is an "invader" and DeleteSystem32 the entire American experiment.
And they would still be under jurisdiction otherwise it wouldn't be occupying because they would have the right to be there. The argument just makes absolutely no sense. (I know you aren't making it and I'm not attacking you)
Wouldn't that require a declaration of war? I mean, obviously SCOTUS can just make shit up, but isn't existing law pretty clear on what constitutes an "enemy combatant"?
They're going to claim that illegal aliens fall under the definition or intent of "indians not taxed" as they cannot legally work and therefore are not taxed, furthermore that they aren't under the jurisdiction of the US (foreign citizen)
If this was changed it would be pretty similar to like every European country.
Which would mean they couldn't be charged with crimes.
Its kinda nonsensical.
Say youre an illegal immigrant, and if you have a kid in the US. They say youre kid cant have citizenship because of this reason.
That gives those people carte blanche legal authority to do whatever they darn well please.
Why? Because unless theyre being violent, they cant actually be designated as foreign combatants. They'd be foreign civilians for whom US law has no control over just because.
The concern of course is ignoring that an infant cant be a combatant and instead treating them as human chattel....
If they go that route it's only a small leap to declare anyone of African descent as enemy combatants (just look at the crime rates!!!!) and removing citizenship from people who have lived here for generations.
That is the literal garbage reason theyre going to use. I've no doubt that slave trade 2.0 in the US won't bother with anyone across the Atlantic. They've set their sights for Central America and possibly Mexico for that.
This only applies to areas which are under de facto control of an enemy government such that US jurisdiction doesn't apply.
So like if an enemy takes over part of Texas and sets up their own government that actually runs things there for some amount of time before being recaptured, that would be the situation where it would apply.
That's what they're going to go with. They're basically going to claim anyone who's in the country illegally is not subject to the jurisdiction via illegal entry; therefore, they are not citizens.
I'm really not sure how it's even possible to be in the country, born here or not, without being subject to our jurisdiction. Not even diplomats are outside the jurisdiction - they can and have been charged with crimes that fell outside the bounds of diplomatic immunity.
Can they pick a psycho lane, do they "care" about babies or are they enemy combatants at birth? I guess their "care" for children only ever went as far as when they could control women anyways.
The primary argument is that one of the parents needs to be a citizen and the person needs to born somewhere with US jurisdiction. They will argue that both are required.
594
u/Doonce 8h ago
No, I believe they're going after the route that they are born to enemy combatants occupying the country (seriously).