Trump Claims He Can Overrule Constitution With Executive Order…

A report from the US:

Saying his latest executive order was legal due to an “underutilized but totally feasible workaround,” President Trump claimed Tuesday that he could overrule the U.S. Constitution by means of the relatively obscure “no one will stop me” loophole.

“My critics say a constitutional amendment or at least an act of Congress is necessary to end birthright citizenship, but what they don’t realize is that a seldom-evoked administrative guideline ensures I can do whatever I want, whenever I want, because zero people will stand in my way,” said Trump, adding that the largely unheard-of clause allows him to circumvent normal legal proceedings because it’s not like anyone in any branch of government remains effective enough to prevent him from doing so.

“Though few modern presidents have made use of it, this loophole has always given the nation’s chief executive unilateral power over the Constitution. Its provisions dictate that the president can sidestep any checks and balances on his power once he has abused his authority so many times that no one can keep track anymore.”

Trump added that while his opponents may try to challenge his executive order in court, the loophole also states that by then he will have achieved his immediate political aims.

Trump Claims He Can Overrule Constitution With Executive Order Because Of Little-Known ‘No One Will Stop Me’ Loophole is from Onion, but this isn’t:

President Donald Trump said on Wednesday the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee the right to citizenship to everyone born in the country, an assertion that runs counter to the long-established legal interpretation of the document.

“So-called Birthright Citizenship, which costs our Country billions of dollars and is very unfair to our citizens, will be ended one way or the other. It is not covered by the 14th Amendment because of the words ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’ Many legal scholars agree…..” Trump wrote in a Twitter post six days before U.S. congressional elections.

The Constitution’s 14th Amendment, added after the Civil War, grants citizenship to anyone born on American soil and was intended to give constitutional protections to former slaves. But some Republicans, including Trump, say it creates an incentive for people to enter the country illegally to have children.

It can be hard to differentiate between satire and what Trump actually says.

Leave a comment

47 Comments

  1. David

     /  November 1, 2018

    “all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” You could interpret that with a certain amount of nuance as lawyers do, it looks like its just needs a law passed in Congress and ratified by the Senate rather than just an executive order, but not an amendment to the constitution, and there is plenty of support to change this absurd situation. I think Canada is the only other developed country that allows birthright citizenship.
    278000 or more than 10% of all births in the US fit this category, the Democrats wanted to adios this law without this level of excited reaction. I dont get the “satire” reference to what is a serious problem that ranks in the top 3 of US citizens concerns. Helen Clark rid us of birthright citizenship, the least satirical politician ever.

    Reply
    • High Flying Duck

       /  November 1, 2018

      It’s a farce when Trump says…exactly what others have said previously without being belittled and subject to these histrionics.

      Reply
    • High Flying Duck

       /  November 1, 2018

      And the 14th Amendment absolutely provides for birthright – except in the eyes of the guy who wrote it.

      Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  November 1, 2018

        That has to be from Onion. Otherwise the whole thing is meaningless.

        Reply
        • High Flying Duck

           /  November 1, 2018

          The highlighted part is what Trump and Harry Reid were both talking about.
          Not meaningless at all. Basically you should not be able to become a citizen by simply being born in the country if your parents are foreign nationals.

          Reply
          • Kitty Catkin

             /  November 1, 2018

            If only people whose parents were born there are citizens, then there’d be none….Trump wouldn’t be one….

            Reply
            • High Flying Duck

               /  November 1, 2018

              There are other ways of becoming a citizen Kitty. And the 14th amendment was enacted many generations after the country was colonised.
              Birthright has been used by millions of illegals to circumvent otherwise strict residency and citizenship rules.
              Trump is a citizen, as is Melania, so why would Trump’s children be any issue?

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  November 1, 2018

              My daughter was born in Canada at a time when my wife and I had permanent residency there and although it’s never become an issue I’ve always thought she could probably claim Canadian citizenship if she wished. Making the rules more complicated than birth location seems a bad idea liable to cause hardship, especially since the parents may differ in their residency and citizenship status or come from countries that refuse to have them back..

            • Corky

               /  November 1, 2018

              Alan, I have two passports. In this troubled world having two passports ( if possible) is a very wise thing to have in my opinion.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  November 1, 2018

              I hope that they are real ones, issued by a government not sold by a person who has made them themselves !

            • High Flying Duck

               /  November 1, 2018

              Al, the rules seem sensible until people book holidays to the USA or sneak across the border while heavily pregnant just to give birth and gain residency.
              I think all countries give residency based on the residency of their parents, so just being born in another country doesn’t make you stateless.
              I was born in Singapore, and yet have no chance of citizenship there as it is carefully managed.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  November 1, 2018

              @HFD, do you mean residency or citizenship? They are critically different. Refugees could easily produce stateless children likely having no paperwork to prove any other citizenship.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  November 1, 2018

              Apologies – I meant citizenship. I understand it is difficult where refugees are involved, but I’m not sure Trump’s changes are designed to deal with that area – simply to stop automatic citizenship of the USA by virtue of being in the country when born.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  November 1, 2018

              He may find that he can’t override these things just because he doesn’t like them.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  November 1, 2018

            What about the Trump children ?

            Reply
            • Kitty Catkin

               /  November 1, 2018

              The 14th amendment doesn’t seem to include the highlighted words. They may or may not have been there in the INTENTION of the man who introduced it, but they don’t seem to be there now. If they were, there’d be no problem, it would exclude children of foreigners and there’d be no question of them being citizens. It wouldn’t take a lawyer to work that one out.

              It (the quote) seems to exclude almost everyone who’s not an ‘American; anyway.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  November 1, 2018

              The highlighted words were the thoughts of the person who drafted the amendment. His belief was that the wording was sufficient to achieve this.
              The amendment has obviously been interpreted in a different manner, but has never been tested in court.
              David’s comment above covers it nicely.

  2. Corky

     /  November 1, 2018

    In this case president Trumpy should proceed. However, it highlights why I believe any constitution people of New Zealand invoke should have as it’s final clause the right of the populace to remove the sitting executive should they try to circumvent any preceding clauses.

    As it now stands, the American Constitution goes around this issue in a circuitous way using the second amendment…but ironically, as I understand it, without protection from the Constitution for such action by the American people.

    In New Zealand absolute power rests with Jacinda. That is scary. Who know what she could do under pressure.

    Reply
    • Griff.

       /  November 1, 2018

      In New Zealand absolute power rests with Jacinda

      .
      NZ is a monarchy our leader is QEII NZ .
      The governor general her agent here can sack the entire government at any time.
      The prime minister can be sacked by cabinet by a simple majority vote .
      The party can remove Jacinda’s membership at any time so effectively dismiss her.

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  November 1, 2018

        ”NZ is a monarchy our leader is QEII NZ .”

        in reality null and void should we so choose.

        ”The governor general her agent here can sack the entire government at any time.”

        That’s is not quite right. That can’t be done straight off the bat. But again null and void should we choose.

        ”The prime minister can be sacked by cabinet by a simple majority vote .”

        Quite true..then absolute power resides with the new leader. All that changes is the leader.

        ”The party can remove Jacinda’s membership at any time so effectively dismiss her.”

        I’m not sure about that, but probably true. I don’t know. But again it makes no difference.

        All the above can be argued, but the reality is without a Constitution we can ride rough shod over our figurehead leaders in a foreign land.

        Reply
          • Gezza

             /  November 1, 2018

            Reply
          • Gezza

             /  November 1, 2018

            You have to keep opening pages until you get to a url that ends in ” .gif ” if you want it to display here.

            Reply
            • The Consultant

               /  November 1, 2018

              A meta-argument then; window-licking intellectual capabilities revealed in the act of trying to demonstrate other’s window-licking thinking? 😉

            • Griff.

               /  November 1, 2018

              I tried that last time i posted it to the screen licker
              It did not load .
              Might have added the dash by misstook.

              Yess the consultant.
              Except I am right about the limits of power within our constitutional arrangements and Corky is deluded .
              His first comment was bad enough his second was gibbering incoherent nonsense.

            • Gezza

               /  November 1, 2018

              If you “open image in new tab” (or equivalent option) and bookmark that one I posted above, should be easy to just open the bookmark and copy THAT URL next time. To get that one, I just kept doing the OIINT on each new opened page until I got the page with only the image and with a .jpg url.

            • Griff.

               /  November 1, 2018

              I bookmarked it seeing as it seems to frequently be warranted for our friends contribution.

              What does absolute mean in English?
              free from restriction or limitation; not limited in any way: absolute command; absolute freedom. unrestrained or unlimited by a constitution, counterbalancing group, etc., in the exercise of governmental power, especially when arbitrary or despotic: an absolute monarch.

              Not even wrong.

            • Gezza

               /  November 1, 2018

              All good Griff. Don’t mention it. No need to thank me. It was my pleasure to be of assistance. Off to get some gas for the car and get ready visit Ma in hospital now. Be good. 😉
              Keep an eye on Sir Alan for me.

            • Corky

               /  November 1, 2018

              ”What does absolute mean in English?

              ”Free from restriction or limitation; not limited in any way: absolute command; ”

              Correct..we are getting somewhere.

              ”Absolute freedom. unrestrained or unlimited by a constitution, ”

              Yep..😃

              ”In the exercise of governmental power, especially when arbitrary or despotic: an absolute monarch.”

              Yeah, name me the legislation that can stop our government should they wish to go feral? There’s nothing of note. We would need outside help.

              What an idiot. No wonder you need Gezza to tell you what to bookmark.

              Mate, I’m through wasting my time with you.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  November 1, 2018

              I would love to think that that was true and there would be no more rambling drivel about things like the PM having absolute power in NZ, which would make them a dictator and elections meaningless.

              But experience shows that it won’t.

              If the PM has absolute power, why do we have a parliament or elections? A PM whose power has no limits could choose their own MPs and close down elections.

            • Griff.

               /  November 1, 2018

              Read this
              https://gg.govt.nz/office-governor-general/roles-and-functions-governor-general/constitutional-role/constitution
              It will not help you because it will be way over your limited ability to understand
              In law The Government is only in control because QEII NZ allows them to be.
              The Queen though the governor general can dissolve parliament at any time* . The Queen is the Crown that is QEII NZ is the sovereign authority in NZ not Parliament .
              Note QEII NZ is not the same entity as QEII of England .
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crown
              QEII NZ only reigns with the consent of our goverment .
              In practice as in law neither is an absolute power in NZ.

              *NZ has never used the office of governor general in such a way and hopefully never will.
              It did happen in Australia in 1975.
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis

            • Griff.

               /  November 1, 2018

              PS the snark was not for you kitty.

  3. The Consultant

     /  November 1, 2018

    I doubt Trump can do this by Executive Order but it is actually a debatable argument rather than one that his opponents, as on every “Trump” issue, simply handwave away – as if they have overwhelming credibility.

    As has been pointed out above, the use of the 14th Amendment on this issue is simply another interpretation that has simply never been legally challenged by any President or Congress. Now it may be.

    There’s also a bigger issue here that needs to be aired: it may surprise a lot of people but the US Supreme Court is not the be-all-and-end-all of pronouncements on what is and is not Constitutional. The President and Congress actually have equal weight. In fact the Supreme Court only took upon itself the power of “judicial review” in the famous Marbury v. Madison case in 1803: there is nothing in the US Constitution that actually gave the Court such powers. They took it and because it seemed reasonable to have judges pronouncing on law, everybody else goes along with it.

    Most of the time! Andrew Jackson was probably the first President to defy to openly defy the Court, but he would not be the last. Countless Republicans in the 1850’s made it quite clear that they were not going to obey the ruling in the Dredd Scott case. Given the number of “sanctuary cities” that have been established by Democrats in violation of immigration laws passed by large, bipartisan votes, it would be interesting to see what they think of their stance. I recall that an entire civil war was fought over the issue of secession from the Union because of an objection to laws passed or likely to be passed.

    From a purely legal POV I’d love to see this argument proceed to the SCOTUS.

    Reply
  4. Alan Wilkinson

     /  November 1, 2018

    A good discussion above which highlights how vacuously partisan much (most?) of the MSM reportage is.

    Reply
  5. Zedd

     /  November 1, 2018

    MrT sounding less like a Pres. for ‘We the People’ & more like ‘Us the white folks/others we do like ONLY’ ?
    ….avoiding the godwin….

    Reply
  6. The Consultant

     /  November 1, 2018

    Why do so many people want to get into the USA so they can be oppressed?

    Reply
  7. Gezza

     /  November 1, 2018

    Decided to skip anything to do with Trump today. Utter boredom has set in. He is what he is and he will be till he carks it. The rest is just a circus.

    Reply
    • The Consultant

       /  November 1, 2018

      That’s fantastic Gezza. I’d like to think that PG will not post any other thread concerning the USA, Trump, the US Constitution, SCOTUS, … you name it, ever again.

      Because it’s all effectively irrelevant to Kiwi’s, no?

      No impact here in NZ – aside from the economic effects of a China-US trade war.

      Excellent. Well in that case I’ll be able to ignore Gender Theory, Queer Theory, Intersectionality, White Male Privilege and the like. It’ll never make it’s way to NZ universities and from there to general NZ culture and politics.

      Back to the Pukeko’s, the warm Spring sun, and the gurgling streams.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  November 1, 2018

        Oh, no, please don’t get me wrong TC. It’s just that I think maybe taking a break from the Trump Circus for a while is probably a good idea for everyone every now & then. It’ll just keep rolling on and on, and I can still check in from time to time to see what the current outrage, about what, from both sets of supporters, is. And whether it’s got any particular relevance to me on that day.

        Not sure where where you’re posting from but it’s 11.13 pm here at Pookden Manor in Kiwiland. The pukekos are all asleep like any smart bird would be and the gurgling stream they probably find quite soporific at this hour.

        It would be fucken fantastic if we could have a bit of warm Spring sun on a far more regular basis than we’ve been getting it so far. If you have any contacts that could arrange this I’d be most grateful. Ever since The Greens got into government we’ve been getting shit weather, tbh. Not sure if there’s a connection but I’m certainly ruling anything out at this stage.

        Excellent. Well in that case I’ll be able to ignore Gender Theory, Queer Theory, Intersectionality, White Male Privilege and the like. It’ll never make it’s way to NZ universities and from there to general NZ culture and politics.

        Well, that’s up to you. But those things all continue to interest me and I’ll be taking an active interest in the weird and wonderful goings on in all of those strange fields. Seems to me like the freaks and weirdos and other racists aren’t happy to just live and let live, they want to fucking run things their way.

        But thanks for your approval. I live for the approval of others.

        (I don’t really. This might explain how I operate:

        A. No of fucks given what other people think:
        -2
        B. No of fucks given what wankers think:
        A x 1000
        ——————–
        No of fucks given what you think:
        -2000

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  November 1, 2018

          *certainly NOT ruling anything out
          Apologies for poor proof-reading there. I also opened a bracket and didn’t close it but it’s late and I/m tired, & it didn’t really need a bracket, so I hope you’ll forgive that error; it’s quite a small one. o_O

          Reply
  1. Trump Claims He Can Overrule Constitution With Executive Order… — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s