U.S. Politics - Birthright citizenship

[amalthia]

So I've been reading the news and this whole topic of birth-right citizenship has been mentioned in multiple articles on the NYT. What's frustrating to me is none of the articles mention the slippery slope aspect. If a president can use executive orders to bypass the US constitution, what's to prevent this person from removing other constitutional amendments? Why aren't the Republicans complaining about this?

What's to stop the next president from removing the "right to bear arms" from the constitution? The one amendment that republicans love more than any other?

To me, the best way to protect the constitution is to remind the republicans that we won't always have Trump as president, and once the precedent is there to use executive orders to bypass the constitution then it's all fair game for removal.

Hate to say it but reminding people of all the great food that immigrants have brought to the U.S. isn't going to be enough to protect the constitution. I find it infuriating that this supreme court is even hearing the case! This should have been kicked back and the president told if he wants the change convince congress to amend the constitution.

There are so many things going wrong in the world today...but for some reason not seeing the logical conclusion to president deciding which constitutional amendments they want to keep listed in any news article was just too much for me not to say something.

Comments

[ride_4ever]

*in total agreement with you*

[devilc]

Well, it's the NYT. Who are now bought and paid for by the GQP.

[amalthia]

Looks like I'm going to have to branch out and find news at the BBC too.