Will he “ end it” for the Russians that came to Florida to give birth? Or will they get special treatment because they are wealthy and vote Republican?
Read the Constitution! Can’t believe how clueless American are about how our government works. Trump makes a stupid statement and MSNBC salivates. The congressman explained that executive order does not amend the Constitution!
He will only end for those who came illegally and give birth in the country....but that's not the case to those who came legally such as green card holders, on working visa or tourist visa....only to those illegal or undocumented immigrants who give birth to anchor babies for them to exploit by using anchor babies as meal ticket to be able to stay in the country.....OK?
We are the only country that does this and they need to end it. You shouldn’t be able to just get your pregnant wife or girlfriend across the border and now you can get your whole family here? No. I have two grandchildren born in England while my daughter and son-in-law worked there, they are not British citizens.
@elaineteut what you are complaining about is chain migration. Very different than birth right citizenship, which is the 14th amendment. Anyone born in the jurisdiction of the United States is a citizen regardless of where their parents are born.
@elaineteut1249 30 other countries do birthright citizenship, you should do your research before posting things you heard Trump say. Research is important
@ Which countries do it then. To many people take advantage of it. Biden should be in jail for opening the border like he did. After all the ridiculous restrictions they put us through during Covid and then just open the border to millions from every third world country was criminal. They never checked for criminal backgrounds, diseases (we now have whooping cough going around), nothing.
Irish Catholic mothers who travel to the US to gain American and Irish citizenship for their children. The Irish-American vote is no longer important ?? :-)
He’s still pent up on trying to overturn a lot of what Obama did. It’s absolutely ridiculous how childish and vindictive he is and how sad I am that so many voted for him.
My admonition to those that voted for Donald: be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it, and you're not going to like it. You can return a car or a television. You cannot return a president.
The United States of America is a melting pot of different people from different countries..it's what made this country thrive..Trump's wife does she have to return to her birthplace as her parents..?
Are you honestly surprised? Trump’s obsessed w Obama bc he exacerbates every insecurity that he (Trump) has, just by being himself: an intelligent, talented, self-made Black man, who’s secure in all aspects of himself & his masculinity! Plus, Obama publicly emasculated Trump at the WH Correspondents Dinner just by telling the truth & that shook Trump to the core of all of his personality disorders!
Trump looks absolutely miserable in this interview. He looked even more miserable in Paris last week. His miserable personality has taken over since the election, and this is what we’re going to be dealing with for the next four years. A miserable, stubborn, old man. ‘Rules’ mean nothing (to him) as a means to maintain a civilized society, because he…himself, refuses to obey rules. But instead (to him) rules will be manufactured implemented (by him) for everyone else to obey, and also to ‘punish’ anyone who questions him. Can you say dictator?
Thank you for being an honest American. Americans need to get honest with themselves. Racism, sexism in American has been here since the beginning. We need to be honest not always living in denial. Denial blocks change.
Wow I never saw this guy before this interview but please keep these types of senators in the forefront…. He showed you can be intelligent and a politician…. 😮😮😮
@@garyyoung3179 not sure you can grasp or understand more than black and white concepts, or more than one thing at a time. You’re too limited and simplistic in your cognition. The only way to fix that is to learn and educate yourself, and to think critically. Are you capable of that?
It's in the Constitution that if you are born here you are an American citizen. As to the border, the amount of people coming through has gone down 75%. @@garyyoung3179
Awesome, and Congratulations Andy Kim, I was hoping you would win that seat. You seem very smart, dedicated and sensible, those happen to be my favorite kind of people, especially Senators. You deserve this opportunity.
Acting as dictator by abusing use of executive orders is illegal. Even the president shouldn’t be able to change our laws and constitution with his words. The president’s job is to SERVE the people by representing the interests and will of the people (all citizens). He needs to present his concerns to the people, let the opposition present their concerns and let the people decide. We are a democracy!
It's a question... Is the U.S. a nation of freedom, hope, and opportunity, or is it a place of intolerance, hatred, and segregation? We can't be both... We need to be better. So we need to change for the better. Our national ideals should be good, and they should exist in this reality. Not just in comic books and propoganda.
TRUMP has unforunately given voice to the worst part of the Country,a Country founded on the biggest holocaust NEVER really narrated and pretty much washed off the books. The fairy tale of a country based on freedom,equal rights,peace and love has finally showed its real nature: RACISM,VIOLENCE,IGNORANCE. WELCOME TO THE US. RUDE AWAKENING.
@RickMylbani-n2u HOW DO YOU THINK YOUR ANCESTORS SURVIVED AT THE BEGINING,WHAT MAKES BELIEVE YOU HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN OTHERS,WHY ARE YOU SO SPECIAL??? HYPOCRATE.
@RickMylbani-n2u no. It requres 2/3 vot e by BOTH Houses of Congress, or if 2/3 of the states request it, a convention. It is a very high hurdle which is a good thing.
@@jerseygirl1748 The Supreme Court threw out section 3 of the 14th amendment during the CO ballot case. You're assuming these people are still playing by the rules, and they're not.
He’s gonna do a lot of things that is against the constitution. Republicans are saying they have the court, so they can do anything and the corrupt Supreme Court will back them.
My understanding is that birthright citizenship is a Constitutional right, which means it would require an amendment to the Constitution. It won’t happen.
I wouldn't say it won't happen. It was an amendment to the Constitution that instituted it after the Civil War. There's no reason why it can't be amended again to Jus Sanguinis other than it's something of a bureaucratic hurdle to achieve.
@@garyyoung3179 A proposed amendment can be proposed by 2/3 vote in Both houses of congress. It requires 3/4 of state legislatures state conventions are needed to Ratify the amendment. …
I'm so glad that there a such incredible smart Senators like Andy Kim who literally are working for the success of the people and the country not like Trump and his hatred filled retributionist MAGA Putin allied coward Senators. We have to unfortunately tolerate for the next four years his tilted crazy reality show only because he was fighting to stay out of jail and his personal vendettas nothing else. We're going to have nothing done in the next four years sadly.
The only reason birthright citizenship was enacted was to deal with the issue of newly freed black slaves after the civil war, because technically they were not citizens before the civil war. It was an attempt to create a legal mechanism for these freed slaves to be made into US citizens, it was never meant to be used to be used as a loophole circumvent our immigration laws.
Sorry Dude, you are wrong...Instead of making up your own nonsensical interpretation of the 14th Amendment, I suggest you go back and look at the record-There is a fabulous legislative report from May of 1857 that basically says you are full of it. And also if that report written more than a decade before the ratification of the 14th Amendment isn't enough. How about the Supreme Court decision in 1898 that also tells us you are making stuff up. (Just for funsies-the justice that wrote the majority opinion in that case, was and advisor on that 1857 legislative report)
Why did they use birthright citizenship instead of going to each of these newly freed men, women, and children and administering mass testing to class them as citizens or non-citizen
There are almost enough Red States to invoke a Constitutional Convention, in which they could literally rewrite the Constitution and no one could stop them.
I see many people complaining about those babies becoming americans immediately, but those kids will become future taxpayers. Their contributions to social security will finance the retirement of future retirees. They will expand our economy. Otherwise, we would be dealing with the same issues other countries do (Italy and Japan). Things do not have to be black or white.
@CandiceMMartinez the data disagrees with your statement or fallacy, I would say. Hispanics represent 19 percent of the US population, and their number in the labour force is 31.8 million in 2023. It has increased 69 percent since 2003. Perhaps you have lived in an impoverished area and have drawn your conclusion based on your experiences.
@@criscross7362 She is partially correct; Maybe a few become taxpayers, they know more about our tax system and our entitlement system than most Americans. Many work under the table, much of their income is returned to family members back in their home country.
The law if changed is not retro-active it would only apply to newborns at the time of switchover. But to further your question, if he had a further son born after the change he would inherit US citizenship at birth from his father.
@@garyyoung3179the trump cult propaganda is insane, I’ve read the same old trumpslaning on multiple videos 😂 imagine having to explain what your leader says every time because he speaks in lies …
I know I laughed at that one tulsi gabbard respected yeah by Putin Kim Jung un etc democrats should be glad she left the party and republicans are welcomed to her
What happens to children born of military service personnel off of sovereign soil and how far back does he plan to go back for ending birthright citizenship?
Nothing happens it's the same as it is now children born to US citizens anywhere gain US citizenship at birth. Ending birthright citizenship in the US would only apply to newborns post the change to jus sanguinis. The only people then who would be excluded from citizenship at birth would be children born to non-US temporary residents or illegal residents. They would have to gain US citizenship through naturalisation.
Don't be so sure. He currently has both houses, and the majority of SCOTUS, so exactly how could he not get the 'interpretation' of the US Constitution to rule his way? Also as he and some believe the American people. Once again, the devil works hard, but Stephen Miller and Leo Leonard work harder.
@@jacksonfan221Trump's base is the uneducated and you are proving this to us all. Finish Middle School first and let the adults who completed social studies make comments 😂😂😂
@@jacksonfan221Trump and his cult don't care that he routinely breaks the law. He's been a criminal all his life, and he's not going to let being president stop his continuing crime spree.
Trump saying "this isn't our fight"...he doesn't understand that if we don't do anything, others will (likely bad).You either do something or stand by and watch the world close in on you...
We don’t anything shows weakness and makes use vulnerable and who will be willing to help us if we don’t help others we got help when we were attacked on 911 from our Allies if something were to happen again others may not be so inclined to help us
All the Supreme Court does not is need to reinterpret the 14th amendment. It was designed to give federal citizenship to freed slaves, because some states refused to offer state citizenship to freed slaves.
Wrong. The federal citizenship was "granted" by the Civil Rights Act of 1866. However, because the concept of who was and was not eligible to be a citizen was hotly debated throughout first half of the 19th century-a lot of that time they argued about Americans on the high seas and who could get a patent-Congress used the issue of freed slaves to push the larger Constitutional issue. At the time, the greatest need for clarification was the citizenship of freed slaves but it was not the only need
The baby belongs to the same jurisdiction of their parents. If the parents' visa expires or they get deported, you don't separate the child and parent. You deport both.
The 13t, 14th and 15th amendments were written with Black Americans in mind. They were written specifically to incorporate Black Americans into American society, something that had not happened on July 4th 1776. There is a case to be made that birthright citizenship isn't for a foreigner who just so happens to touch American soil.
@@JB-lp9xr we have the right to form militias, doesn't mean having a gun requires the militia. Its Litterally the first step to forming one. No guns, no militia. Very silly argument based on a lack of understanding. The OP is correct. This should actually be offensive to the descendants of slaves. Must be nice for citizenship and freedom be handed out to folks that didn't suffer.
Such a myopic view requires overlooking nearly 100 years of case law. The 14th Amendment has been used to incorporate most of the Bill of Rights, making them applicable to the states. Through a footnote in a New Deal case involving a filled milk product, the Court has developed three tiers of judicial scrutiny, especially regarding equal protection under the 14th A. Sure, the Court can rein in the protections offered under the Civil War Amendments, but overturn all the cases?
The Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Wong Kim Ark in 1898 that birthright citizenship applies to more than just African Americans. That is the interpretation we've been operating under for a century at this point. If people want to amend the Constitution, then we can discuss that, but let's not be revisionist here. Opening up this issue will open a can of worms. If people want to stem illegal immigration, why are they focusing on legal U.S. citizens? If people are worried about "anchor babies" they can pass laws to discourage the process without taking away birthright citizenship.
When Wong was denied reentry into the U.S. after visiting China, he was forced to wait on a ship in San Francisco harbor for months as his attorney pursued his case for citizenship. He was a test case, selected by the Department of Justice in an attempt to prove that people of Chinese descent weren’t citizens. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court. Then something unexpected happened: Wong won. “The Fourteenth] Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States,” wrote associate justice Horace Gray in the majority opinion. Not only was Wong Kim Ark’s claim to citizenship legitimate, Gray wrote, but “To hold that the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution excludes from citizenship the children, born in the United States, of citizens or subjects of other countries would be to deny citizenship to thousands of persons of English, Scotch, Irish, German, or other European parentage who have always been considered and treated as citizens of the United States.”
Lots of people in the comments seem to be unclear about what birthright citizenship means. Ending birthright citizenship means if at-least one of your parents was (not) born in America then you do not get automatic citizenship, even if you are born in America. Most European countries do not have "full" birthright citizenship, meaning at-least one parent has to already be a citizen of that European country in order for the child to get automatic citizenship. Also Japan and China require one parent to be a Japanese citizen or Chinese citizen in order to get citizenship. This change will likely ONLY affect NEW babies born to immigrant(non-US citizen parents) on American soil. Google "Birth Tourism USA" and you will see exactly why Trump wants to change this rule, and why most of Europe and the leading Asian countries already (do not) grant automatic birthright citizenship unless at-least one of the parents is already a citizen.
Illegal line-cutters be GONE. We want our housing back. We're tired of seeing them get State and local government jobs over U.S.Citizens. We're done paying for healthcare and other subsidies that our own homeless and veteran population doesn't get.
The 14th amendment was to ensure that the children of slaves would be given citizenship. Illegal Immigrants who essentially are unauthorized tourists in this country or those who are on a temporary visa may not be necessarily be given the same rights because the courts do look at the intent of Congress at the time for the meaning of law.
Rich of him to defend "birthright citizenship" when his own country doesn't allow it. People born in Korea are only born citizens if one of their parents is already a citizen. It is 2024 now, it is not the 1800s where it was difficult to travel. Anyone can take a quick cheap flight and have a baby born and it be a citizen. The US is the only country that allows that. The UK, Australia, NZ etc... don't allow it and neither does Korea!
His country is the United States of America. His country has birthright citizenship and his job is to defend his country's laws which include birthright citizenship. and you are wrong about the other stuff too.
@@pmclaughlin4111which parts am I wrong about? Enlighten me. Also if he’s not Korean then why call him a Korean American? By that logic most Americans would be “British Americans”
It's a very simple concept. He is an American. His ethnic ancestry is Korean. His country is the United States. Here is another on for you. I am an American. My ancestry is British (arrived 1760s), Irish (arrived 1870s) Italian (arrived 1900s) and Mikmaq (arrived 1900 from Canada). My country is the United States. So, can you put aside your racist xenophobia long enough to comprehend that part of how wrong you were. The OTHER thing you were wrong about is your understanding of which countries have birthright citizenship. Most democracies have birthright citizenship. (including all those you said didn't) Perhaps the most restrictive is Japan which still has on its books their 19th century nationality law but post WW2 created a small carve out fot birthright citizenship to comply with the 1957 Convention and 1967 Protocol on stateless persons. In the Western Hemisphere, all countries have birthright citizenship. So, the answer to your question "what parts were you wrong about" is all parts. Bet you are used to that.
@@pmclaughlin4111 First of all, the countries I mentioned-the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and all of Europe (most democracies)-do not have “birthright citizenship.” None of these countries allow tourists to show up, give birth, and have their child automatically granted citizenship. They require at least one parent to be a citizen or a legal resident. So no, they’re not comparable to the U.S., where birthright citizenship applies to anyone born on U.S. soil, no matter how temporary the parents’ stay. Second, your rant about ancestry and citizenship is irrelevant to the actual point. No one’s debating that people can have mixed ancestry while being citizens of one country. The issue is how different nations handle citizenship laws, and you’ve completely misrepresented the facts. And while you’re throwing around terms like “racist xenophobia,” perhaps you should direct some of that outrage toward countries like Japan or Korea, where restrictive nationality laws blatantly exclude people based on ancestry and bloodline. But I guess it’s easier to bash the U.S. than to confront the reality of exclusionary policies elsewhere. The bottom line? If you’re going to try to dunk on someone, at least get your facts straight. Otherwise, you just look foolish.
@@petercomfort9651 I already replied explaining your foolishness and ignorance but I realized I forgot to emphasize one important thing. Your original post was about your feelings about Senator Kim defending the United States of America, his country. and your feelings were hurt because he defended his country.
To end birthright citizenship, dont they have to write a Constitutional amendment and go through the whole process of States voting for it and the Congress voting for it?
Many countries given fast travel have restrictions. People came to the us to live historically. Not birth on transit. If someone leaves like this are they really participating in the United States? Fair to restrict.
Let’s focus on why birthright citizenship was enacted and ask if it still serve purpose in modern day. I am an immigrant and I came here legally. I became a citizen to embrace my new life and to live here as a citizen. I see so many non US citizens fly here to just give birth to give us citizenship to their child just to have it. This just don’t sit well for me.
Why dont u people get it right if your a illegal imagrant and u have A KID ITS NOT A US CITIZEN ITS LIKE THAT IN ALL COUNTRIES IN CANADA IF U ARE ON VACATION U HAVE A KID ITS NOT A CANADA CITIZEN IN US THE KID WOULD BE A CITIZEN get it right and quit spreading lies
However, we should do something about those people who come to our country on the tourism visa just to give birth to make their kids American citizens. Many of them leave the US with their kids' American passports without paying for the hospital bills (they are tourists, so no US addresses). If a baby is born in the US and the baby's family is already US citizens or legal residents, that baby is an American citizen 100%. But if non-American people abuse our constitution and system, we should do something about it. I have seen lots of Asian people doing this and lots of wealthy Africans doing this. They pay nothing to our government, yet their hospital bills are paid by our taxes. How is that right and fair?
4:40 The very well known "purpose" of the 14th Amendment was to give citizenship to freed slaves. The purpose was not to give citizenship to criminals who cross our borders illegally.
@@MrPhoenix357 Most of the world doesn't employ birthright citizenship. Most developed countries abandoned it decades ago over immigration concerns. It would have no negative practical consequences but as it requires Consitiutional change not likely to happen any time soon.
Wrong but thank you for playing. The issue of what qualified a person to be a citizen was hotly debated throughout the anti-bellum period. The issue had blown up several times most notably in disputes with the British over impressment of American sailors. There were also issues related to military service-could you be a citizen of a state but not an American citizen (that was a hot button debate) The Reconstruction Amendments provided an opportunity to address the issue of citizenship AND Justice Horace Gray who wrote the majority opinion in US v Wong Kim Ark (the one that says you are wrong) actually was involved in the discussion BEFORE the Civil War. You are entitled to your own opinion, even your hate filled ignorant one, but not your own facts
Hmmm, Melania Trump was born on April 26, 1970 in Slovenia. His current wife is the second First Lady born outside of the United States, and she is the only First Lady to become a naturalized United States citizen.
It does need to stop. America is an established country and people need to earn their citizenship now. This isn’t an odd thing to do. This policy needs to evolve.
Are you actually saying that the United States should abolish the Constitution as a way to evolve... Wow you are a real leftist anarchist...Careful MAGA feels very threatened by people like you
Americans, some of you guys seem so ignorant. Of course, pple take advantage of d fact that a non-american can give birth in d U.S and d baby is automatically a citizen of d US. It's a fact i know as a foreigner. Even d UK doesn't do that. You have to have lived in d UK for certain number of years to be a citizen or one of your parents has to be citizens... That birthright citizenship needs to be modified for d times we live in to avoid abuse.
The Constitution should be amended to stop the abuse. It makes sense to consider an amendment when I consider why the amendment was created and how it has been abused. Executive action will not survive a constitutional challenge. Trump knows this and will use the executive action to trigger a constitutional amendment that the citizens of the US will support.
First the would require for the Constitution to be a living document which the originalist supper majority court disagrees with. To pass a constitutional amendment you have to have three quarters of the states agree, so lets do some math here, that is 38 states solely agreeing on this. Good luck with that. Despite that fact that DUMP THE CON supposedly won the popular vote, this is incorrect because there were more people that did not vote for him. Then there are all those pesky lawyers and scholars way above his way grade that will challenge him.
@@juliemissick4206 Sadly the America you or even I grew up in no longer exists. The new America is ok with stripping people of their rights because it will ensure them cheaper groceries. There is a reason why Americans rank so low on the world's education list. The election of DUMP THE CON isn't helping. Sadly with his new super majority of SCOTUS, precedent is at convivence.
@@juliemissick4206 I don't see why not as there is no real downside to changing to Jus Sanguinis and inherited citizenship. Certainly, if people understand how it works, it's obviously a Constitutional hurdle though.
Well let’s look at it this way. A coworker of mine stated that her parents came over here ,on a visit/vacation, with intent to give birth , just so she could be a citizen. Fact
Did they return to their original country?? Where was she raised?? And when did she decided to return to the US. Most likely your example is not the norm.
Yeah well, that's definitely not happening on a widespread level to make any difference bud. Here's the fact. Without birthright citizenship, nobody's a citizen eventually, including your own family. Wanna know what that means? Your family will eventually be illegal.
Then trump family should get their birthright citizenship revoked too. Is people forgot that Trump senior was borned in Canada after his grandady flee germany? 😂
With SCOTUS' immunity ruling, he could start signing pre-written executive orders starting Day One, which could uppend the entire government. I would not be surprised if he, at some point, declares Martial Law. Disgraced General Flynn had suggested he do just that and now the guardrails are gone.
I teared up when I saw the pictures of him cleaning up the Capitol. An American citizen on his hands and knees, committed to cleaning up the mess that Trump has made! I hope he has opportunity to run for president, because I would vote for him!
The 13th and 14th Amendments pertainined to freed slaves. "A major provision of the 14th Amendment was to grant citizenship to “All persons born or naturalized in the United States,” thereby granting citizenship to formerly enslaved people."
it was the 14th amendment that gave way to birth right citizenship case in the Wong Kim Ark was a Chinese-born American who won a landmark Supreme Court case in 1898 affirming birthright citizenship for all people born in the United States.
The 14th Amendment did pertain to freed slaves AND everyone else. That included Americans on the high seas, Americans that served in the military, Americans who wanted a patent, Americans of any descent ...all of which were issues of citizenship that came up in the first half of the 19th century. I am not sure where you got your quotation but you should read some of the primary source documents from about 1826 to 1861
Who cares what this guy thinks? He has personally benefited from it so of courseee he doesnt like it. As a blk AMERICAN(a real American) one who’s family has been in this country for many CENTURIES, put an end to it. Its time to do away with something that has been misused by MILLIONS like him and his parents.
American citizens’ children will never lose the 14th amendment constitutional right. The children of non citizens have to prove that the 14th amendment was intended for them ?
Not quite how it works. Children with at least one parent who is either a US citizen or legal permanent resident would acquire citizenship at birth. Children born to temporary residents or illegal residents would only be able to obtain US citizenship through naturalisation.
When Wong was denied reentry into the U.S. after visiting China, he was forced to wait on a ship in San Francisco harbor for months as his attorney pursued his case for citizenship. He was a test case, selected by the Department of Justice in an attempt to prove that people of Chinese descent weren’t citizens. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court. Then something unexpected happened: Wong won. “The Fourteenth] Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States,” wrote associate justice Horace Gray in the majority opinion. Not only was Wong Kim Ark’s claim to citizenship legitimate, Gray wrote, but “To hold that the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution excludes from citizenship the children, born in the United States, of citizens or subjects of other countries would be to deny citizenship to thousands of persons of English, Scotch, Irish, German, or other European parentage who have always been considered and treated as citizens of the United States.”
@ That last part is a lie because I’ve read the Supreme Court decision of the Wong case and it said because of the treaty with the Chinese emperor blocked Wong Kim’s parents ( whom were green card holders) the ability to get naturalized was unconstitutional , Wong won his case for citizenship. Immediately following the case America 🇺🇸 nullified the treaty with the Emperor of China. Then Congress passed the Chinese exclusion act.
@ Wong won his case and his alone because his family were permanent residents and was blocked by treaty and the Chinese exclusion act from getting naturalized . Naturalization is still law and it still covers the children of naturalized immigrants. The Supreme Court recognized that it’s unlawful to block naturalization and block citizenship by birth and since his family were permanent residents and it he was living here for over 21 years at the time . The court granted Wong Kim by no means did the court extend constitutional rights to the global community with that decision.
He met with Zelensky Ukraine's leader even though he was not in office . That was irritating.. Why does he want to end birthright citizenship? That would be impossible isn't it?
It's somewhat illogical to demand border controls yet support birthright citizenship. Most of the countries in the world restrict it in favour of Jus Sanguinis where a child takes their nationality from their parent(s). What that would mean for the US is unless you had at least one parent who was either a US citizen or a legal resident you would not be a US citizen at birth and would have to acquire it through naturalisation. Most people would never notice a difference. As to whether it's possible? It would require a Constitutional amendment so the bureaucratic hurdle is very high. However, it's worth bearing in mind it was an earlier Constitutional Amendment that instituted it. So not impossible just difficult.
@@garyyoung3179 First of all there are no open borders. Second, how many children are actually born to illegal immigrants?? What harm to the country that they are automatically citizens?? Why are you so personally opposed to it????
It would work as a brake on immigration as it further hinders birth tourism, as the only future way for non citizens to acquire US citizenship is through legal immigration and the naturalisation process.
Why should it? They are all American citizens born to BOTH the mother and father who are and were also legal American citizens. Do the sheep who speak out on what they know little about ever look for the truth? Doesn't sound like it.
Lol he doesn’t what he wants is total loyalty to America or allies who manage their own weight. European nations hasn’t invested in their military’s and by NATO rules shouldn’t be in the alliance. Trumps ideal ally chain if left NATO is unknown as he is unpredictable in how he deals with other nations. What’s known is it would include majority of non NATO US allies like Japan or SK. Most his alliances would be built to counter economic rivals to the U.S. Namely China and potentially BRICS as a whole.
If we're talking about naturalization, then yes, nearly every country will have some form of test and language proficiency requirements. For birthright or descendant citizenship, there are no tests.
You're proud of a lazy, short attention span, dimwit weakling of a POTUS who didn't read PDB's ( Presidential Daily Briefings ). Also Doofus Donald posting 50 times a day on social media because his feelings were hurt by Jimmy Kimmel, Bill Maher, and Saturday Night Live.
Unless your mom or dad are a legal US citizen you should not just get US citizenship. This is something that ahould have been amended a long time ago to keep foreign agents from infiltrating our government. We should have a universal agreement with all other countries that works in tandem with that policy.
Once upon a time, a former slave made a case to the Supreme Court, and they said he wasn't American. So, the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was used to address that issue. The Wong Kim Ark case, which went to the Supreme Court, was a different issue, as his parents were legal residents. However, the issue of children born to illegal immigrants was truly left unsettled by the Supreme Court.
How is he going to go above our own United States Amendments? That’s what I would like to know. Executive action can’t do that. The Supreme Court can’t do that. The president can’t do that.
Not sure I see the issue with this. It would cause tens if not hundreds of thousands of people to lose any reason to try and enter the country illegally, only by entering legally would they and their children still have the ability to claim citizenship. Basically you only get birthright citizenship if your born to actual citizens. Am curious how it would apply to those immigrating to the US, I assume it'd be tied to the green card but it may apply to only full citizens as well.
Most countries with Jus Sanguinis allow birth citizenship to those who are also legal permanent residents so I would imagine that would be the case for green card holders. Obviously, though such details can differ from country to country.
@@garyyoung3179 yeah, looking around limitations to birthright citizenship does differ abit from country to country but normally revolves around some sort of legal residency.
Back to Korea is where he should've gone. What kind of stupid question is that? He was an anchor baby. The parents had him and his sister here to secure their place in the United States.
If you want to know a person's position on birthright citizenship, just ask them if their parents or grandparents crossed our border legally or illegally. That's all you need to know.
Attempting to end citizenship to the last wave of immigrants is what I believe he is referring; they have way to many children and often ended up getting financial assistance because they can’t not afford them. Amending the constitution will be a battle.
I don't even think that senator was brought on to talk about trump yet they somehow made trump the entire convo. Glad dude wasn't hostile tho and overall neutral
Will he “ end it” for the Russians that came to Florida to give birth?
Or will they get special treatment because they are wealthy and vote Republican?
He won't end anything. This change will require a constitutional amendment which is difficult to accomplish.
Read the Constitution! Can’t believe how clueless American are about how our government works. Trump makes a stupid statement and MSNBC salivates. The congressman explained that executive order does not amend the Constitution!
He will only end for those who came illegally and give birth in the country....but that's not the case to those who came legally such as green card holders, on working visa or tourist visa....only to those illegal or undocumented immigrants who give birth to anchor babies for them to exploit by using anchor babies as meal ticket to be able to stay in the country.....OK?
Russians cant vote in American elections. And were ending ALL birthright citizenship.
Of course they’re going to get the Cuban treatment 💀
If birthright citizenship is ended then everyone but the indigenous people should have to leave. 🤷♀️
Correct
Exactly! Get rid of everyone who are not Native Americans....Trump is proving again that he is definitely a dumbmass.
Exactly
Facts! I wonder how far back he’s gonna go?
Including his children
My Black, (enslaved) family has been in the USA longer than t-rump’s. How far back is he trying to go?
He's talking about anchor babies.
The guy who said he would have NEGOTIATED an end to the Civil War? The 1820s.
Enslaved people have the 13th amendment granting their citizenship. Learn your history.
90000 years
This isn't about you. I know you think everything is about the slavery you never experienced but it's not.
What! End birthright...then everyone would have to go...everyone, including Trump.
We are the only country that does this and they need to end it. You shouldn’t be able to just get your pregnant wife or girlfriend across the border and now you can get your whole family here? No. I have two grandchildren born in England while my daughter and son-in-law worked there, they are not British citizens.
@elaineteut what you are complaining about is chain migration. Very different than birth right citizenship, which is the 14th amendment. Anyone born in the jurisdiction of the United States is a citizen regardless of where their parents are born.
@elaineteut1249 30 other countries do birthright citizenship, you should do your research before posting things you heard Trump say. Research is important
@ Which countries do it then. To many people take advantage of it. Biden should be in jail for opening the border like he did. After all the ridiculous restrictions they put us through during Covid and then just open the border to millions from every third world country was criminal. They never checked for criminal backgrounds, diseases (we now have whooping cough going around), nothing.
@elaineteut1249 America is supposed to be better than England, not a crappy country that wants to be like England.
Andy Kim - so thoughtful. I cant wait to see what he will accomplish!
These foreigners changing our country to what they left,
Does the birthright citizenship also include white people 🤔
They were the first immigrants!
Irish Catholic mothers who travel to the US to gain American and Irish citizenship for their children. The Irish-American vote is no longer important ?? :-)
@@gyronniemcintire8761 yep
Wrong! The first immigrants were the people who crossed the Bering Strait from Asia to enter North America.
His parents were immigrants does that include donOld
He’s still pent up on trying to overturn a lot of what Obama did. It’s absolutely ridiculous how childish and vindictive he is and how sad I am that so many voted for him.
@ I “habe” no idea what I’m talking about? Please enlighten us with your infinite wisdom.
@@gfoster1972😂
My admonition to those that voted for Donald: be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it, and you're not going to like it. You can return a car or a television. You cannot return a president.
The United States of America is a melting pot of different people from different countries..it's what made this country thrive..Trump's wife does she have to return to her birthplace as her parents..?
Are you honestly surprised? Trump’s obsessed w Obama bc he exacerbates every insecurity that he (Trump) has, just by being himself: an intelligent, talented, self-made Black man, who’s secure in all aspects of himself & his masculinity! Plus, Obama publicly emasculated Trump at the WH Correspondents Dinner just by telling the truth & that shook Trump to the core of all of his personality disorders!
Hold the line, Senator - we're counting on all of you to hold the line. Trump doesn't even know the Constitution. Lord have mercy.
May satan bless ur soul
Trump looks absolutely miserable in this interview. He looked even more miserable in Paris last week. His miserable personality has taken over since the election, and this is what we’re going to be dealing with for the next four years. A miserable, stubborn, old man. ‘Rules’ mean nothing (to him) as a means to maintain a civilized society, because he…himself, refuses to obey rules. But instead (to him) rules will be manufactured implemented (by him) for everyone else to obey, and also to ‘punish’ anyone who questions him. Can you say dictator?
Dictator? Absolutely and a New Regime. America has turned into something else, no longer Land of the Free
Because he may not of wanted to be president again he only ran to avoid criminal charges and trials and maybe prison
Truth! ❤
Thank you for being an honest American. Americans need to get honest with themselves. Racism, sexism in American has been here since the beginning. We need to be honest not always living in denial. Denial blocks change.
If he does have the beginnings of Alzheimer's disease like his father had, that nasty, miserable personality trait may very well get worse over time.
Wow I never saw this guy before this interview but please keep these types of senators in the forefront…. He showed you can be intelligent and a politician…. 😮😮😮
We just love him- NJ
Andy Kim is wonderful, no question.
Someone tell drumpf that if he ends birthright citizenship, he’s not qualified to president anymore!!!!😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣
Do you support open borders or are you in favour of immigration controls?
I just realized your brain only has two neurons left inside of it
@@garyyoung3179 not sure you can grasp or understand more than black and white concepts, or more than one thing at a time. You’re too limited and simplistic in your cognition. The only way to fix that is to learn and educate yourself, and to think critically. Are you capable of that?
@@garyyoung3179if you voted trump you support open borders. He allowed the highest flow of illegal migrants since 2003...
It's in the Constitution that if you are born here you are an American citizen. As to the border, the amount of people coming through has gone down 75%. @@garyyoung3179
Awesome, and Congratulations Andy Kim, I was hoping you would win that seat. You seem very smart, dedicated and sensible, those happen to be my favorite kind of people, especially Senators. You deserve this opportunity.
Acting as dictator by abusing use of executive orders is illegal. Even the president shouldn’t be able to change our laws and constitution with his words. The president’s job is to SERVE the people by representing the interests and will of the people (all citizens). He needs to present his concerns to the people, let the opposition present their concerns and let the people decide. We are a democracy!
I truly hope it unfolds this way. The way it seems, however, this may be a coin flip on the direction of this country
Won't be surprised if he took notes from South Korea and declares martial law to get what he wants if needed...
Like Dementia Joe!!!
It's a question... Is the U.S. a nation of freedom, hope, and opportunity, or is it a place of intolerance, hatred, and segregation?
We can't be both... We need to be better. So we need to change for the better. Our national ideals should be good, and they should exist in this reality. Not just in comic books and propoganda.
TRUMP has unforunately given voice to the worst part of the Country,a Country founded on the biggest holocaust NEVER really narrated and pretty much washed off the books. The fairy tale of a country based on freedom,equal rights,peace and love has finally showed its real nature: RACISM,VIOLENCE,IGNORANCE. WELCOME TO THE US. RUDE AWAKENING.
@RickMylbani-n2u HOW DO YOU THINK YOUR ANCESTORS SURVIVED AT THE BEGINING,WHAT MAKES BELIEVE YOU HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN OTHERS,WHY ARE YOU SO SPECIAL??? HYPOCRATE.
@@Orrenn looks like currently it’s the second one.
@RickMylbani-n2u you’re an illegal immigrant, if you’re not Native American. End of story.
@RickMylbani-n2u I’ve been paying taxes since I was 14. How long have you been paying them?
Ugh, the sheer dumbth of thinking you can upend a Constitutional amendment with an executive action.
Tell that to Obama and the NSA spying on civilians. Tell that to Biden telling big tech to silence freedom of speech.
You know how persistent a toddler can be...
@RickMylbani-n2u no. It requres 2/3 vot e by BOTH Houses of Congress, or if 2/3 of the states request it, a convention. It is a very high hurdle which is a good thing.
@@1kewlglamma Yeah we do, you are a prime example.
@@jerseygirl1748 The Supreme Court threw out section 3 of the 14th amendment during the CO ballot case. You're assuming these people are still playing by the rules, and they're not.
He can’t end birthright citizenship because it’s written into the constitution. He sure couldn’t use an executive order to do that.
He’s gonna do a lot of things that is against the constitution. Republicans are saying they have the court, so they can do anything and the corrupt Supreme Court will back them.
but the scary thing is that is that he has so many people backing him up that he just might end up being successful
He can do it. It just needs to be clarified.
It's not written into the constitution that you can fly in on vacation...pop a baby out then fly back home with that kid being a US citizen.
He has the SCOTUS on his side
My understanding is that birthright citizenship is a Constitutional right, which means it would require an amendment to the Constitution. It won’t happen.
I wouldn't say it won't happen. It was an amendment to the Constitution that instituted it after the Civil War. There's no reason why it can't be amended again to Jus Sanguinis other than it's something of a bureaucratic hurdle to achieve.
Have the Supremes interpreted that specific provision of the 14th A?
@@garyyoung3179 A proposed amendment can be proposed by 2/3 vote in Both houses of congress. It requires 3/4 of state legislatures state conventions are needed to Ratify the amendment. …
@@garyyoung3179go back to school kid the adults are talking about stuff you have no clue about
@@honeybadger1847 Supreme court decide it because 14th A doesn't specify if it included illegals and tourists.
I'm so glad that there a such incredible smart Senators like Andy Kim who literally are working for the success of the people and the country not like Trump and his hatred filled retributionist MAGA Putin allied coward Senators. We have to unfortunately tolerate for the next four years his tilted crazy reality show only because he was fighting to stay out of jail and his personal vendettas nothing else. We're going to have nothing done in the next four years sadly.
Enjoy the next 4 years. Trump said he loves you and the best retribution is success. 🙏🇺🇸🦅
You lost. Cope and seethe
Allieshellteracism NYC 😢
Andy Kim is an outstanding person and I'm sure he will do well as a senator. Congrats Andy!
Congratshellteracism NYC 😢
The only reason birthright citizenship was enacted was to deal with the issue of newly freed black slaves after the civil war, because technically they were not citizens before the civil war. It was an attempt to create a legal mechanism for these freed slaves to be made into US citizens, it was never meant to be used to be used as a loophole circumvent our immigration laws.
Sorry Dude, you are wrong...Instead of making up your own nonsensical interpretation of the 14th Amendment, I suggest you go back and look at the record-There is a fabulous legislative report from May of 1857 that basically says you are full of it. And also if that report written more than a decade before the ratification of the 14th Amendment isn't enough. How about the Supreme Court decision in 1898 that also tells us you are making stuff up. (Just for funsies-the justice that wrote the majority opinion in that case, was and advisor on that 1857 legislative report)
Why did they use birthright citizenship instead of going to each of these newly freed men, women, and children and administering mass testing to class them as citizens or non-citizen
Ending birthright citizenship would involve amending the Constitution. Good luck with that…….
There are almost enough Red States to invoke a Constitutional Convention, in which they could literally rewrite the Constitution and no one could stop them.
They just need 2/3 of the House and Senate. They could get that during midterms.
@@ammonioussaccasWho are they because the Repubs not going to win the house next election
Great interview! Thank you!
Terrible interview as the journalist and the senator left out important facts
And Trump pooped his pants
Go back to school kid the adults are talking about stuff you have no clue about @krlosv18
@jefffentross6932 oh, wow! I see you're here to provide mature commentary
"fixed Covid first"? Huh?
Yeah in the last year of his term, he had to fix COVID first, before he could do anything else during his first three years. Time travel paradox.
😂😂😂I nearly fell off my chair laughing at those words," I had to fix Covid first!" 😂😂😂
Quick Everyone Injest BLEACH 😅
@@jefffentross6932”When you test to that extent, you’re going to find more people, more cases. Slow the testing down, please.”
-d trump
I see many people complaining about those babies becoming americans immediately, but those kids will become future taxpayers. Their contributions to social security will finance the retirement of future retirees. They will expand our economy.
Otherwise, we would be dealing with the same issues other countries do (Italy and Japan).
Things do not have to be black or white.
Maybe a few become taxpayers. Most obviously go on welfare - hence the explosion of poverty since welfare started.
@criscross, not if we stop killing babies in the womb.. Geez..
@ ☝️Yep’ one of the many reasons
@CandiceMMartinez the data disagrees with your statement or fallacy, I would say. Hispanics represent 19 percent of the US population, and their number in the labour force is 31.8 million in 2023. It has increased 69 percent since 2003.
Perhaps you have lived in an impoverished area and have drawn your conclusion based on your experiences.
@@criscross7362 She is partially correct; Maybe a few become taxpayers, they know more about our tax system and our entitlement system than most Americans. Many work under the table, much of their income is returned to family members back in their home country.
What about his son?
What about his son? Melania is a US citizen who did it through the proper channels. That makes his son an American.
The law if changed is not retro-active it would only apply to newborns at the time of switchover. But to further your question, if he had a further son born after the change he would inherit US citizenship at birth from his father.
@@jacksonfan221 True, and Barron's father, Donald Trump, is an American citizen regardless.
@@garyyoung3179the trump cult propaganda is insane, I’ve read the same old trumpslaning on multiple videos 😂 imagine having to explain what your leader says every time because he speaks in lies …
@@hoiguyclips9774 kinda tough when the propaganda is 100% true.
Congratulations Andy 🎉
Tulsi Gabbard - respected by whom? Putin?
Exactly. Trump is trying to destroy our country.
I know I laughed at that one tulsi gabbard respected yeah by Putin Kim Jung un etc democrats should be glad she left the party and republicans are welcomed to her
All of us patriots
@@Leslie-v3u1wNot MAGAts.
People without purple hair and pronouns
What happens to children born of military service personnel off of sovereign soil and how far back does he plan to go back for ending birthright citizenship?
Outstanding insight, if I may add.
Very well said
Nothing happens it's the same as it is now children born to US citizens anywhere gain US citizenship at birth. Ending birthright citizenship in the US would only apply to newborns post the change to jus sanguinis. The only people then who would be excluded from citizenship at birth would be children born to non-US temporary residents or illegal residents. They would have to gain US citizenship through naturalisation.
They are citizens dummy
@@JB-lp9xrTed Cruz also
Trump can't change our laws like that! What a dip-stick!😂
I have a better name for the Turd pit.
Don't be so sure. He currently has both houses, and the majority of SCOTUS, so exactly how could he not get the 'interpretation' of the US Constitution to rule his way? Also as he and some believe the American people. Once again, the devil works hard, but Stephen Miller and Leo Leonard work harder.
Yes he can and he will.
@@jacksonfan221Trump's base is the uneducated and you are proving this to us all. Finish Middle School first and let the adults who completed social studies make comments 😂😂😂
@@jacksonfan221Trump and his cult don't care that he routinely breaks the law. He's been a criminal all his life, and he's not going to let being president stop his continuing crime spree.
The "first day" of Trump will have at least 744 hours. What a stable genius!!
Trump saying "this isn't our fight"...he doesn't understand that if we don't do anything, others will (likely bad).You either do something or stand by and watch the world close in on you...
😆 🤣 😂 😹
So are you shipping out to do patrols of syria?
Sure we send you and your family first
We don’t anything shows weakness and makes use vulnerable and who will be willing to help us if we don’t help others we got help when we were attacked on 911 from our Allies if something were to happen again others may not be so inclined to help us
Exactly.
All the Supreme Court does not is need to reinterpret the 14th amendment.
It was designed to give federal citizenship to freed slaves, because some states refused to offer state citizenship to freed slaves.
Wrong. The federal citizenship was "granted" by the Civil Rights Act of 1866. However, because the concept of who was and was not eligible to be a citizen was hotly debated throughout first half of the 19th century-a lot of that time they argued about Americans on the high seas and who could get a patent-Congress used the issue of freed slaves to push the larger Constitutional issue. At the time, the greatest need for clarification was the citizenship of freed slaves but it was not the only need
The baby belongs to the same jurisdiction of their parents. If the parents' visa expires or they get deported, you don't separate the child and parent. You deport both.
👍👍 Mr Kim
The 13t, 14th and 15th amendments were written with Black Americans in mind. They were written specifically to incorporate Black Americans into American society, something that had not happened on July 4th 1776. There is a case to be made that birthright citizenship isn't for a foreigner who just so happens to touch American soil.
@@JB-lp9xr we have the right to form militias, doesn't mean having a gun requires the militia. Its Litterally the first step to forming one. No guns, no militia. Very silly argument based on a lack of understanding. The OP is correct. This should actually be offensive to the descendants of slaves. Must be nice for citizenship and freedom be handed out to folks that didn't suffer.
Such a myopic view requires overlooking nearly 100 years of case law. The 14th Amendment has been used to incorporate most of the Bill of Rights, making them applicable to the states. Through a footnote in a New Deal case involving a filled milk product, the Court has developed three tiers of judicial scrutiny, especially regarding equal protection under the 14th A.
Sure, the Court can rein in the protections offered under the Civil War Amendments, but overturn all the cases?
The Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Wong Kim Ark in 1898 that birthright citizenship applies to more than just African Americans. That is the interpretation we've been operating under for a century at this point. If people want to amend the Constitution, then we can discuss that, but let's not be revisionist here. Opening up this issue will open a can of worms. If people want to stem illegal immigration, why are they focusing on legal U.S. citizens? If people are worried about "anchor babies" they can pass laws to discourage the process without taking away birthright citizenship.
@@americanminotaur2518yes, but the 14th amendment was made with Black Americans in mind tho🤔
When Wong was denied reentry into the U.S. after visiting China, he was forced to wait on a ship in San Francisco harbor for months as his attorney pursued his case for citizenship. He was a test case, selected by the Department of Justice in an attempt to prove that people of Chinese descent weren’t citizens.
His case went all the way to the Supreme Court. Then something unexpected happened: Wong won. “The Fourteenth] Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States,” wrote associate justice Horace Gray in the majority opinion.
Not only was Wong Kim Ark’s claim to citizenship legitimate, Gray wrote, but “To hold that the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution excludes from citizenship the children, born in the United States, of citizens or subjects of other countries would be to deny citizenship to thousands of persons of English, Scotch, Irish, German, or other European parentage who have always been considered and treated as citizens of the United States.”
Lots of people in the comments seem to be unclear about what birthright citizenship means. Ending birthright citizenship means if at-least one of your parents was (not) born in America then you do not get automatic citizenship, even if you are born in America. Most European countries do not have "full" birthright citizenship, meaning at-least one parent has to already be a citizen of that European country in order for the child to get automatic citizenship. Also Japan and China require one parent to be a Japanese citizen or Chinese citizen in order to get citizenship. This change will likely ONLY affect NEW babies born to immigrant(non-US citizen parents) on American soil. Google "Birth Tourism USA" and you will see exactly why Trump wants to change this rule, and why most of Europe and the leading Asian countries already (do not) grant automatic birthright citizenship unless at-least one of the parents is already a citizen.
Did he say "New babies" haven't heard DJT actually say what you infer.
Here we go, MAGA interpreting his words.
Illegal line-cutters be GONE.
We want our housing back.
We're tired of seeing them get State and local government jobs over U.S.Citizens.
We're done paying for healthcare and other subsidies that our own homeless and veteran population doesn't get.
The 14th amendment was to ensure that the children of slaves would be given citizenship. Illegal Immigrants who essentially are unauthorized tourists in this country or those who are on a temporary visa may not be necessarily be given the same rights because the courts do look at the intent of Congress at the time for the meaning of law.
analyze USA versus Wong
Rich of him to defend "birthright citizenship" when his own country doesn't allow it. People born in Korea are only born citizens if one of their parents is already a citizen. It is 2024 now, it is not the 1800s where it was difficult to travel. Anyone can take a quick cheap flight and have a baby born and it be a citizen. The US is the only country that allows that. The UK, Australia, NZ etc... don't allow it and neither does Korea!
His country is the United States of America. His country has birthright citizenship and his job is to defend his country's laws which include birthright citizenship. and you are wrong about the other stuff too.
@@pmclaughlin4111which parts am I wrong about? Enlighten me. Also if he’s not Korean then why call him a Korean American? By that logic most Americans would be “British Americans”
It's a very simple concept. He is an American. His ethnic ancestry is Korean. His country is the United States.
Here is another on for you. I am an American. My ancestry is British (arrived 1760s), Irish (arrived 1870s) Italian (arrived 1900s) and Mikmaq (arrived 1900 from Canada). My country is the United States.
So, can you put aside your racist xenophobia long enough to comprehend that part of how wrong you were.
The OTHER thing you were wrong about is your understanding of which countries have birthright citizenship. Most democracies have birthright citizenship. (including all those you said didn't) Perhaps the most restrictive is Japan which still has on its books their 19th century nationality law but post WW2 created a small carve out fot birthright citizenship to comply with the 1957 Convention and 1967 Protocol on stateless persons. In the Western Hemisphere, all countries have birthright citizenship.
So, the answer to your question "what parts were you wrong about" is all parts. Bet you are used to that.
@@pmclaughlin4111 First of all, the countries I mentioned-the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and all of Europe (most democracies)-do not have “birthright citizenship.” None of these countries allow tourists to show up, give birth, and have their child automatically granted citizenship. They require at least one parent to be a citizen or a legal resident. So no, they’re not comparable to the U.S., where birthright citizenship applies to anyone born on U.S. soil, no matter how temporary the parents’ stay.
Second, your rant about ancestry and citizenship is irrelevant to the actual point. No one’s debating that people can have mixed ancestry while being citizens of one country. The issue is how different nations handle citizenship laws, and you’ve completely misrepresented the facts.
And while you’re throwing around terms like “racist xenophobia,” perhaps you should direct some of that outrage toward countries like Japan or Korea, where restrictive nationality laws blatantly exclude people based on ancestry and bloodline. But I guess it’s easier to bash the U.S. than to confront the reality of exclusionary policies elsewhere.
The bottom line? If you’re going to try to dunk on someone, at least get your facts straight. Otherwise, you just look foolish.
@@petercomfort9651 I already replied explaining your foolishness and ignorance but I realized I forgot to emphasize one important thing. Your original post was about your feelings about Senator Kim defending the United States of America, his country. and your feelings were hurt because he defended his country.
My daughter was born in Seoul, South Korea and was not even given the option to be a Korean citizen...
Hey Mr. Kim! Senator! Yes!
I donated to Sen. Kim campaign. Glad he won.
Me too~~
To end birthright citizenship, dont they have to write a Constitutional amendment and go through the whole process of States voting for it and the Congress voting for it?
Then let’s do it. Nothing has been accomplished in the past 4 years under Biden so we can wait…
Many countries given fast travel have restrictions. People came to the us to live historically. Not birth on transit. If someone leaves like this are they really participating in the United States? Fair to restrict.
He is going to do everything in day 1 🤣 what a clown
Let’s focus on why birthright citizenship was enacted and ask if it still serve purpose in modern day. I am an immigrant and I came here legally. I became a citizen to embrace my new life and to live here as a citizen. I see so many non US citizens fly here to just give birth to give us citizenship to their child just to have it. This just don’t sit well for me.
Why dont u people get it right if your a illegal imagrant and u have A KID ITS NOT A US CITIZEN ITS LIKE THAT IN ALL COUNTRIES IN CANADA IF U ARE ON VACATION U HAVE A KID ITS NOT A CANADA CITIZEN IN US THE KID WOULD BE A CITIZEN get it right and quit spreading lies
However, we should do something about those people who come to our country on the tourism visa just to give birth to make their kids American citizens. Many of them leave the US with their kids' American passports without paying for the hospital bills (they are tourists, so no US addresses). If a baby is born in the US and the baby's family is already US citizens or legal residents, that baby is an American citizen 100%. But if non-American people abuse our constitution and system, we should do something about it. I have seen lots of Asian people doing this and lots of wealthy Africans doing this. They pay nothing to our government, yet their hospital bills are paid by our taxes. How is that right and fair?
4:40 The very well known "purpose" of the 14th Amendment was to give citizenship to freed slaves. The purpose was not to give citizenship to criminals who cross our borders illegally.
Yes, but it applies to all people. Changing the 14th amendment would be a bad idea..
@@MrPhoenix357 Most of the world doesn't employ birthright citizenship. Most developed countries abandoned it decades ago over immigration concerns. It would have no negative practical consequences but as it requires Consitiutional change not likely to happen any time soon.
You are inferring that all are criminals because they came here illegally.
Maybe the pathway to entering the US needs to be addressed.
Wrong but thank you for playing. The issue of what qualified a person to be a citizen was hotly debated throughout the anti-bellum period. The issue had blown up several times most notably in disputes with the British over impressment of American sailors. There were also issues related to military service-could you be a citizen of a state but not an American citizen (that was a hot button debate) The Reconstruction Amendments provided an opportunity to address the issue of citizenship AND Justice Horace Gray who wrote the majority opinion in US v Wong Kim Ark (the one that says you are wrong) actually was involved in the discussion BEFORE the Civil War. You are entitled to your own opinion, even your hate filled ignorant one, but not your own facts
Hmmm, Melania Trump was born on April 26, 1970 in Slovenia. His current wife is the second First Lady born outside of the United States, and she is the only First Lady to become a naturalized United States citizen.
Kristen is a horrible interviewer. She never challenges or pushes back.
It does need to stop. America is an established country and people need to earn their citizenship now. This isn’t an odd thing to do. This policy needs to evolve.
Are you actually saying that the United States should abolish the Constitution as a way to evolve...
Wow you are a real leftist anarchist...Careful MAGA feels very threatened by people like you
What about his wife and all but one of his children that have immigrant mothers?
The first one is dead anyways 🤧
And this will never pass they are just trying to get a reaction
yes, because walking into a store doesn't make you an employee either.
😂😂😂So that means trump he's family have to leave america 😢
Senator Kim.
There is nothing that you can do
Trump needs to learn a lesson from Syria. Once we thought an attack "by our own" on the Capitol wouldn't happen too.
Americans, some of you guys seem so ignorant. Of course, pple take advantage of d fact that a non-american can give birth in d U.S and d baby is automatically a citizen of d US. It's a fact i know as a foreigner. Even d UK doesn't do that. You have to have lived in d UK for certain number of years to be a citizen or one of your parents has to be citizens... That birthright citizenship needs to be modified for d times we live in to avoid abuse.
He can’t end anything. It’s in the constitution. It requires an amendment to change it.
The Constitution should be amended to stop the abuse. It makes sense to consider an amendment when I consider why the amendment was created and how it has been abused.
Executive action will not survive a constitutional challenge. Trump knows this and will use the executive action to trigger a constitutional amendment that the citizens of the US will support.
First the would require for the Constitution to be a living document which the originalist supper majority court disagrees with. To pass a constitutional amendment you have to have three quarters of the states agree, so lets do some math here, that is 38 states solely agreeing on this. Good luck with that. Despite that fact that DUMP THE CON supposedly won the popular vote, this is incorrect because there were more people that did not vote for him. Then there are all those pesky lawyers and scholars way above his way grade that will challenge him.
I doubt very much that a majority of Americans would support what you’re suggesting.
@@juliemissick4206 Sadly the America you or even I grew up in no longer exists. The new America is ok with stripping people of their rights because it will ensure them cheaper groceries. There is a reason why Americans rank so low on the world's education list. The election of DUMP THE CON isn't helping. Sadly with his new super majority of SCOTUS, precedent is at convivence.
@@juliemissick4206 I don't see why not as there is no real downside to changing to Jus Sanguinis and inherited citizenship. Certainly, if people understand how it works, it's obviously a Constitutional hurdle though.
Only 76 million out of 340 million voted for him.
Almost 75 million voted for Harris.
And many who would be impacted will NO support this.
Well let’s look at it this way. A coworker of mine stated that her parents came over here ,on a visit/vacation, with intent to give birth , just so she could be a citizen. Fact
Did they return to their original country??
Where was she raised??
And when did she decided to return to the US.
Most likely your example is not the norm.
Yeah well, that's definitely not happening on a widespread level to make any difference bud. Here's the fact. Without birthright citizenship, nobody's a citizen eventually, including your own family. Wanna know what that means? Your family will eventually be illegal.
Then trump family should get their birthright citizenship revoked too. Is people forgot that Trump senior was borned in Canada after his grandady flee germany? 😂
This all is a legislation issue. Not happening immediatley
With SCOTUS' immunity ruling, he could start signing pre-written executive orders starting Day One, which could uppend the entire government.
I would not be surprised if he, at some point, declares Martial Law. Disgraced General Flynn had suggested he do just that and now the guardrails are gone.
Never gonna happen
Actually, it's a Constitutional issue.
Only Native Americans can claim this land... 😒
I teared up when I saw the pictures of him cleaning up the Capitol. An American citizen on his hands and knees, committed to cleaning up the mess that Trump has made! I hope he has opportunity to run for president, because I would vote for him!
Yep end that scam Mr president 🤘
I THINK our Senate and congress has a say, so about what Trump yapping about, If not way are we paying them? 🤔
Play more than sound bites. People deserve to hear more than just how you want to frame it. People are not dumb anymore. The election proved it.
The 13th and 14th Amendments pertainined to freed slaves. "A major provision of the 14th Amendment was to grant citizenship to “All persons born or naturalized in the United States,” thereby granting citizenship to formerly enslaved people."
it was the 14th amendment that gave way to birth right citizenship case in the Wong Kim Ark was a Chinese-born American who won a landmark Supreme Court case in 1898 affirming birthright citizenship for all people born in the United States.
And the 14th Amendment hasn't applied to only slaves for well over a hundred years.
The 14th Amendment did pertain to freed slaves AND everyone else. That included Americans on the high seas, Americans that served in the military, Americans who wanted a patent, Americans of any descent ...all of which were issues of citizenship that came up in the first half of the 19th century. I am not sure where you got your quotation but you should read some of the primary source documents from about 1826 to 1861
This reporter should go to school again. Presidents said recent birth not everyone
Who cares what this guy thinks? He has personally benefited from it so of courseee he doesnt like it. As a blk AMERICAN(a real American) one who’s family has been in this country for many CENTURIES, put an end to it. Its time to do away with something that has been misused by MILLIONS like him and his parents.
American citizens’ children will never lose the 14th amendment constitutional right. The children of non citizens have to prove that the 14th amendment was intended for them ?
Not quite how it works. Children with at least one parent who is either a US citizen or legal permanent resident would acquire citizenship at birth. Children born to temporary residents or illegal residents would only be able to obtain US citizenship through naturalisation.
@ exactly as the law is written
When Wong was denied reentry into the U.S. after visiting China, he was forced to wait on a ship in San Francisco harbor for months as his attorney pursued his case for citizenship. He was a test case, selected by the Department of Justice in an attempt to prove that people of Chinese descent weren’t citizens.
His case went all the way to the Supreme Court. Then something unexpected happened: Wong won. “The Fourteenth] Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States,” wrote associate justice Horace Gray in the majority opinion.
Not only was Wong Kim Ark’s claim to citizenship legitimate, Gray wrote, but “To hold that the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution excludes from citizenship the children, born in the United States, of citizens or subjects of other countries would be to deny citizenship to thousands of persons of English, Scotch, Irish, German, or other European parentage who have always been considered and treated as citizens of the United States.”
@ That last part is a lie because I’ve read the Supreme Court decision of the Wong case and it said because of the treaty with the Chinese emperor blocked Wong Kim’s parents ( whom were green card holders) the ability to get naturalized was unconstitutional , Wong won his case for citizenship. Immediately following the case America 🇺🇸 nullified the treaty with the Emperor of China. Then Congress passed the Chinese exclusion act.
@ Wong won his case and his alone because his family were permanent residents and was blocked by treaty and the Chinese exclusion act from getting naturalized . Naturalization is still law and it still covers the children of naturalized immigrants. The Supreme Court recognized that it’s unlawful to block naturalization and block citizenship by birth and since his family were permanent residents and it he was living here for over 21 years at the time . The court granted Wong Kim by no means did the court extend constitutional rights to the global community with that decision.
You didn't stop to think America shouldn't try to be like other countries?
I assume his parents were here under some legal process so obviously they would have all stayed until they all got citizenship 🤷♂
If both parents are in the United States illegally the child should not be an automatic citizen for being born in America.
Unfortunately, you are entitled to your own opinion. Fortunately, in this case, your hate fueled opinion doesn't count
@@pmclaughlin4111unfortunately you believe false kindness is intelligent.
"To the victor belong the spoils"
He met with Zelensky Ukraine's
leader even though he was not in office . That was irritating..
Why does he want to end birthright citizenship? That would be impossible isn't it?
It's somewhat illogical to demand border controls yet support birthright citizenship. Most of the countries in the world restrict it in favour of Jus Sanguinis where a child takes their nationality from their parent(s). What that would mean for the US is unless you had at least one parent who was either a US citizen or a legal resident you would not be a US citizen at birth and would have to acquire it through naturalisation. Most people would never notice a difference. As to whether it's possible? It would require a Constitutional amendment so the bureaucratic hurdle is very high. However, it's worth bearing in mind it was an earlier Constitutional Amendment that instituted it. So not impossible just difficult.
@@garyyoung3179 First of all there are no open borders.
Second, how many children are actually born to illegal immigrants??
What harm to the country that they are automatically citizens??
Why are you so personally opposed to it????
How might this affect the future of immigration policy in the U.S.? 🇺🇸
Well, if you’re white and from western Europe, you’re acceptable. Otherwise, they’re planning on keeping you out.
It would work as a brake on immigration as it further hinders birth tourism, as the only future way for non citizens to acquire US citizenship is through legal immigration and the naturalisation process.
It's not going to happen
Executive action cannot change the constitution.
This guy his believes his own lies !!
He is in MSNBC.
Why an European American want to do that?
Really so he intends to end birth right citizen ship does that in life his own kids Donny jr Eric and ivanka and Barron
Why should it? They are all American citizens born to BOTH the mother and father who are and were also legal American citizens. Do the sheep who speak out on what they know little about ever look for the truth? Doesn't sound like it.
Trump wants your country isolated and alone
Lol he doesn’t what he wants is total loyalty to America or allies who manage their own weight.
European nations hasn’t invested in their military’s and by NATO rules shouldn’t be in the alliance.
Trumps ideal ally chain if left NATO is unknown as he is unpredictable in how he deals with other nations.
What’s known is it would include majority of non NATO US allies like Japan or SK. Most his alliances would be built to counter economic rivals to the U.S.
Namely China and potentially BRICS as a whole.
Even though I’m a republican, I’m so proud of him for becoming the first Korean American Senator🎉
Where else were you supposed to go? Korea of course.
It’s amazing how he’s gonna get everything done on day one
Hopefully the people of power don’t respect trump and not do what he wants. He’s a resentful and hateful person. Trump is despicable.
The people of power are so wealthy it would make you vomit 🤮
They are not your friend
You mean to tell me that every country in the world has their cutizens pass an exam before being granted citizenship?
If we're talking about naturalization, then yes, nearly every country will have some form of test and language proficiency requirements.
For birthright or descendant citizenship, there are no tests.
Thank God we have a president that doesn’t mumble fumble and or fall asleep
Just craps his nasty pants.
You're proud of a lazy, short attention span, dimwit weakling of a POTUS who didn't read PDB's ( Presidential Daily Briefings ). Also Doofus Donald posting 50 times a day on social media because his feelings were hurt by Jimmy Kimmel, Bill Maher, and Saturday Night Live.
Snakes don't sleep.
@dianacalzadias4334 Snakes do sleep, often. Snakes sleep about as much as cats do.
But says crazy things -
Good thing about the whole thing is : ITS NOT YOUR CHOICE !! Not his choice either . Who cares what you say .
Unless your mom or dad are a legal US citizen you should not just get US citizenship. This is something that ahould have been amended a long time ago to keep foreign agents from infiltrating our government. We should have a universal agreement with all other countries that works in tandem with that policy.
Is that going back 1492?
There are senators in the US government. That should be extremely conflicting. Especially the Democratic sides
Once upon a time, a former slave made a case to the Supreme Court, and they said he wasn't American. So, the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was used to address that issue.
The Wong Kim Ark case, which went to the Supreme Court, was a different issue, as his parents were legal residents.
However, the issue of children born to illegal immigrants was truly left unsettled by the Supreme Court.
How is he going to go above our own United States Amendments? That’s what I would like to know. Executive action can’t do that.
The Supreme Court can’t do that. The president can’t do that.
Not sure I see the issue with this. It would cause tens if not hundreds of thousands of people to lose any reason to try and enter the country illegally, only by entering legally would they and their children still have the ability to claim citizenship.
Basically you only get birthright citizenship if your born to actual citizens.
Am curious how it would apply to those immigrating to the US, I assume it'd be tied to the green card but it may apply to only full citizens as well.
Most countries with Jus Sanguinis allow birth citizenship to those who are also legal permanent residents so I would imagine that would be the case for green card holders. Obviously, though such details can differ from country to country.
@@garyyoung3179 yeah, looking around limitations to birthright citizenship does differ abit from country to country but normally revolves around some sort of legal residency.
Back to Korea is where he should've gone. What kind of stupid question is that? He was an anchor baby. The parents had him and his sister here to secure their place in the United States.
If you want to know a person's position on birthright citizenship, just ask them if their parents or grandparents crossed our border legally or illegally. That's all you need to know.
Attempting to end citizenship to the last wave of immigrants is what I believe he is referring; they have way to many children and often ended up getting financial assistance because they can’t not afford them. Amending the constitution will be a battle.
I don't even think that senator was brought on to talk about trump yet they somehow made trump the entire convo. Glad dude wasn't hostile tho and overall neutral
United States v. Wong Kim Ark A Supreme Court ruling has already made birthright citizenship the law of the land.