Do you not recognize that that letter was most likely signed under duress? She was probably offered to permit her baby to be deported with or or the baby goes into the foster care system, not to the husband. The Felon has specifically used separation from families and destroyed records as a weapon before, why do you think he's not doing it now??
Does it really matter? Of course it was stressful. Most parents would not opt to be separated from a child. Especially mother from a baby…
If you make a decision that comes with a great deal of risk to you and by extension your family (like crossing a border without following a proper immigration procedure). If that gamble doesn’t go your way would you really opt to leave your child if you could?
Perhaps you would. I wouldn’t. Apparently she didn’t want to do that either. I am not going to ascribe any alternative motive other than love between a parent and child.
> She was probably…
> The Felon yada yada yada…
Do you any evidence at all that is what is being done here or are you just inventing a backstory and trying to pass it off as evidence?
> this is a story that really attempts to justify the use of birthright citizenship to create chain immigration …
*Which is the current law of the land.* The existing jurisprudence states that all people born on US land (with the exception of some foreign diplomat children) are US citizens.
The ACLU is arguing to maintain the existing, settled law. Attempts to undo birthright citizenship need to argue how they think it should work and why they think it should be changed without a Constitutional amendment.
Yes, obviously the ACLU will pick a case that has good optics for them. That is how EVERY special interest tries to bring their preferred case up the appeals chain towards SCOTUS. We aren’t ignorant of that. That’s pan outgrowth of the fact that the US court system is adversarial.
Here’s a fun thought experiment: if birthright citizenship requires additional requirements (I think the Trump admin claims it should also require at least 1 parent be a US citizenship at the time of the birth in the USA), does the citizenship rollback apply retroactively? Does it retroactively apply to all generations going back to the founding of the country? Does it go back even further?
Scarier thought experiment: Has any country ever tried to remove citizenship from tens or hundreds of millions of citizens? How do we “deport” people who have known no other country as home and have no paperwork in any other country?
Birthright citizenship may be settled, but the citizen is not the one being deported, the mother is. If the mother has custody of the child and opts to bring the child with them…I doubt you can find any settled case law that establishes that a parent cannot be deported because of the citizenship status of the child….whether a child is minor or not a minor.
Perhaps I need to read it again, but nowhere do I recall reading that the citizenship of the child is being revoked, so this isn’t really challenging birthright citizenship, it’s more about challenging the notion of an anchor baby passing legal residency status to a parent.
