Is the Supreme Court ruling on birthright citizenship an empty ruling?

[Dargil]

The Department of State can regulate whether a pregnant non-citizen enters the United States by denying them a visa. They share this authority with the Department of Homeland Security. Under current immigration policies designed to crack down on "birth tourism," U. S. consular officers overseas have the legal authority to deny temporary visitor visas (B-1/B-2) if they believe the applicant's primary purpose for traveling is to give birth on U. S. soil to obtain automatic citizenship for the child.

Since we know what the Chinese and other nations are doing, this is the solution to that.

[fishbone77]

The department of state and homeland security need to grow some balls, and the downside is when the anti-America party gets back into power, they'll open the floodgates. A constitutional amendment needs to be written.

The SCOTUS is filled with DEI morons nowadays.

[Dargil]

In my humble opinion if the anti America party takes back power gun safes will be unlocked, If you get my drift.

[Ariesman81Nshiiit]

The thing is... we already have laws on the books regarding illegal immigration. I don't think making another law is going to suddenly turn criminals straight.

It really comes down to enforcement. And the punishment for violating the existing laws needs to hurt.

[fishbone77]

@Ariesman81Nshiiit just prevent all pregnant women from traveling to this country.

[Ariesman81Nshiiit]

The current VISA requirements are already rather strict. While they don't explicitly say "No pregnant women" they do make it extremely difficult for a single woman from poorer countries to obtain a travel VISA.

The most logical way I could see it happening is just saying any child born to a non citizen is exempt from citizenship. If a woman is here on a VISA, her child doesn't get citizenship. It seems to be the best compromise.

[fishbone77]

@Ariesman81Nshiiit The problem isn't just poorer women, it's pregnant tourists from China. I agree we need an amendment to re-write birthright citizenship.

[Ariesman81Nshiiit]

Does it really matter if a baby born here has citizenship if the baby's parents can be deported? Do we really care if a baby in China has U. S. citizenship?

[fishbone77]

@Ariesman81Nshiiit yes, it matters. They can come here at 18 and start voting. You think they'll have their home country or US's interests in mind?

[Dargil]

That is the idea.

[Ariesman81Nshiiit]

Well, I don't automatically assume it's a case of espionage or covert takeover.
Though, I recognize it as a possibility.

[exitseven]

It is not an empty ruling. There are things that can be done such as limiting visas and deporting the parents of the so called anchor baby but these policies can just be reversed as soon as democrats gain control.

[Dargil]

Empty for now and a hopeful Rubio or Vance adminisrration. That's why a constutitional amendment is needed. A constutitional conventiention is needed. The first amendment need clarification with regard to religion, the fourteenth regardinb birthright citizenship and the seventeenth reversed.

[exitseven]

Thanks for the MHO😎

[Anonymous]

You guys get more extreme by the minute. You realize that by your own complaints YOU are not a citizen then?

[Dargil]

I will take that as a compliment. Especially from an anonymous Karen.

[Just_Ken]

Yes. Unelected judges interfering with democracy.

[strateguy632]

no and deporting the parents would deter anyone trying to make an anchor baby.