As I may have said before I think the Supreme Court should uphold birthright citizenship.
If I were a member of the Supreme Court (something no one in his/her right mind should want), I would also say that aliens residing in “sanctuary” cities or states are definitionally not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the federal government.
Dave Schuler: I would also say that aliens residing in “sanctuary” cities or states are definitionally not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the federal government.
That doesn’t make sense. Federal officials are empowered to go anywhere, including sanctuary cities, to enforce federal law; so undocumented persons are certainly subject to the jurisdiction of the federal government.
Sanctuary cities decline to recognize the authority of the Federal Government to apprehend and deport aliens who have not the right paperwork. So far, this has not resulted in the Federal Government violently asserting their authority.
I suspect this is how to get both sides angry.
A decision that states the President doesn’t have the power to determine the scope of birthright citizenship; that any theoretical limits on its scope can only be set by Congress; using the precedent from Trump vs Anderson, that Congress has the exclusive power to enforce the 14th amendment. And given that Congress has codified in statute (as currently understood) birthright citizenship, that is it unless Congress can define a narrower scope.
One thing that gives me pause to the argument that the citizenship clause has no scope for reinterpretation or redefinition is the Supreme Court already reinterpreted it to ban automatic loss of citizenship due to dual citizenship — breaking an understanding that stretched back to the Congress that passed the 14th amendment.
walt moffett: Sanctuary cities decline to recognize the authority of the Federal Government to apprehend and deport aliens who have not the right paperwork.
Sanctuary cities just do not provide resources to enforce federal laws.
walt moffett: So far, this has not resulted in the Federal Government violently asserting their authority.
No sanctuary city has used force to stop federal officials from exercising their authority, so why would violence be required for the federal government to assert their authority?
People dont understand sanctuary cities, which is to be expected as the right misrepresents them. The Google Ai gives a good summary.
“Sanctuary policies:
Sanctuary policies generally restrict local law enforcement’s involvement in immigration enforcement actions, such as detaining or questioning individuals based on their immigration status.
Federal immigration enforcement:
Federal immigration enforcement, including ICE, is not barred from operating in sanctuary cities.
Potential for deportation:
Undocumented immigrants in sanctuary cities can still be arrested and deported by ICE.
No absolute protection:
Sanctuary cities do not offer absolute protection from deportation.
Limited impact:
Sanctuary policies primarily aim to limit local resources used for immigration enforcement and improve community trust. ”
The last is important as ICE seems to expect cities to just hold on to people while they take their time getting to them. Really, people should understand this if for no other reason than ICE likes to have big public arrest events in sanctuary cities.
Steve