this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2025
401 points (97.4% liked)

News

30542 readers
2974 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] QuarterSwede@lemmy.world 99 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (8 children)

Lest we forget:

Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Pretty hard to argue that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside” doesn’t mean what it clearly states. It’s not even in legalese. The fact that this wasn’t laughed out of court says everything.

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

I saw a person trying to all caps "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" screaming that this specific clause somehow is the piece that excludes birthright citizenship because something something loyalty to other countries?

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 2 points 50 minutes ago

So like ....kids of illegal aliens are ... sovereign citizens?

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I mean, the 2nd amendment is clearly only about militias, but you can see how that went.

[–] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 hours ago

States need to criminalize the behavior of ICE officers and start arresting them en masse. ICE agents will be free to challenge their imprisonment individually.

[–] ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com 36 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

That's what the Constitution says, and Trump now has nothing that can legally stop him from doing it.

Which means the Constitution is dead letter.

[–] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

That goes both ways, and states need to start acting on it. They need to start passing a flurry of laws criminalizing ICE tactics. Pass laws making it a felony to:

  • Conduct law enforcement while masked

  • To search homes without a warrant

  • To enter various protected locations for law enforcement purposes when there isn't an immediate threat.

They need to take cues from the anti-abortion playbook. Pass a law requiring all immigration detainees be transported in limousines. Require ICE to old prisoners in five star hotels. Require immigration officers to have at least two doctoral degrees. Make it a felony to do immigration enforcement without doing these things. Just start writing dozens of crazy laws criminalizing every aspect of ICE's operations. Then let the individual ICE agents try and challenge them individually.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 1 points 45 minutes ago

Better than that remove all immunity from law enforcement officers if...

They do not have a signed judicial warrant.

They do not verbally and visually identify themselves and the branch or organization they work for.

Without those two things, they cannot be verified as law enforcement acting in official capacity, and they should be treated as regular civilians. If a bunch of regular Joes jump out of a can and try to black bag you, you should have the right to defend yourself with lethal force.

[–] venusaur@lemmy.world 16 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

They haven’t decided on the legality of it yet. They just decided that courts cannot issue universal injunctions. They can only stop it at a case by case level for those who are suing. If they decide it’s unconstitutional, then it’ll have to stop nationally, but a lot of damage can be done before then. I think they’ll decide in October…

[–] uuldika@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 hours ago

I'm looking forward to fucktons of individual suits absolutely slamming the courts every time an EO is issued. crowdfund the filing fees. turn petitions into copypasta. DDoS the Court system. they literally asked for this.

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 11 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (2 children)

It is just a fucking piece of paper.

If the judges and politicians and police don't care and no one else can do anything then it means nothing.

It is this or bloody revolution and that would lead to the US being invaded by multiple other countries and shit getting worse and worse.

North Korea of America is where we are now.

[–] thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe 18 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Uggh. I can work out whether to upvote you for the accurate summary of the source of law & state power or downvote you for the utter idiocy of the invasion statement.

Russia can't - they're struggling to take over a country a fifth their size and have burnt through their Soviet stockpiles.

UK & EU certainly won't invade, at most they'd send a peacekeeping force to protect civilians at a UN request (UN probably wouldnt pass it)

Canada will be stretched just keeping fighting out of its borders.

Mexico might just on principle (payback's a bitch) but has bugger all capacity.

Same for South American Asian and African countries.

That leaves China, and if you think the Chinese are stupid enough to insert themselves in your civil war and create a sole enemy for both sides to fight you have zero understanding of the Chinese strategy.

The Chinese will wait for you all to decimate the country and each other, then come in and buy up the bits they want. Oh and invade Taiwan while y'all are busy destroying your country.

Putin's plan to destroy the US has worked magnificently.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Canada will be stretched just keeping fighting out of its borders.

Canada just needs to send one guy over to say “you should be our eleventh province” and most of New England will say “yes please, I’m sick of whatever shit the regressives are doing now”

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Mexico might just on principle (payback’s a bitch) but has bugger all capacity.

More accurately, we literally can't be bothered. Our state of affairs doesn't allow for a war, and by that, I mean that a huge national protest would ensue, and many politicians would strike it down for many reasons. Nobody here is interested, and after fighting narcos for so long, we'd rather have peace.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 5 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

It is this or bloody revolution and that would lead to the US being invaded by multiple other countries and shit getting worse and worse.

No other nations are going to be invading the US, let alone multiple of them. They don't have the logistics for it.

[–] sugarfoot00@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 hours ago

Why bother? The US is doing just fine destroying itself.

[–] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 hours ago

Other nations wouldn't invade. But in the event of a civil war, you can be certain they would be sending in plenty of heavy weaponry.

[–] thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe 4 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Or the desire, who the hell would want to try a hostile occupation of the US ?

[–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 5 points 13 hours ago

who the hell would want to try a hostile occupation of the US ?

This administration, it seems.

[–] DancingBear@midwest.social 6 points 20 hours ago

That’s technically not what they ruled on

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 5 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

The problem is and has always been "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"

People have been twisting that to mean that anyone that isn't born to American citizen parents means that you are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 13 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Funny because that sounds to me like the "illegals"can't be illegal then. Sounds like they're not subject to the law anymore.

[–] Laser@feddit.org 10 points 19 hours ago

Yeah, this is the thing that's ignored because it would let the whole narrative collapse.

Either you can't deport them because they're American citizens, or you can't deport them because they're not subject to your laws anyway. But in the end, this would just lead to (more) unlawful / illegal deportations.

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

No state shall....but the feds can?

[–] Jyek@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 hours ago

He controls the feds. He's certainly not stopping himself.