Gyroscopic Investing

My sister reminds me that our parents were here legally when we were born, but on temporary work visas, then they became US Citizens after we were born. So according to the recent statement from the Administration, we might not be considered to be US Citizens. The whole thing could be in question at any rate if the EO stands. I don't even speak the language of my parents' nation of origin. Am I going to be Stateless? We're in our 60s and 70s this is effing ridiculous.

My 95 yo Mother is naturalized, so she could stay. But we her kids would have to go?

I hope someone is getting some cosmic satisfaction out of this shock and awe, because I'm not. My BP is running higher today.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-amer ... rcna188652

“There could be a whole generation of stateless children who are not citizens in the United States, but they’re not citizens elsewhere either,” said Aarti Kohli, executive director of the Asian Law Caucus, one of the organizations that is suing the Trump administration over the order."

ochotona wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2025 10:12 am My sister reminds me that our parents were here legally when we were born, but on temporary work visas, then they became US Citizens after we were born. So according to the recent statement from the Administration, we might not be considered to be US Citizens. The whole thing could be in question at any rate if the EO stands. I don't even speak the language of my parents' nation of origin. Am I going to be Stateless? We're in our 60s and 70s this is effing ridiculous.

My 95 yo Mother is naturalized, so she could stay. But we her kids would have to go?

I hope someone is getting some cosmic satisfaction out of this shock and awe, because I'm not. My BP is running higher today.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-amer ... rcna188652

“There could be a whole generation of stateless children who are not citizens in the United States, but they’re not citizens elsewhere either,” said Aarti Kohli, executive director of the Asian Law Caucus, one of the organizations that is suing the Trump administration over the order."

Sad that we cannot expect any form of logic from our country's president.

Goes along with him being the Greatest Fantabulist this country has ever seen!

I even understand wanting to stop gaming the system (fly in from Russia or China or anywhere really, or walk over the southern border, pop a child) but my parents worked their whole lives as Medical Doctors, did become US Citizens when we were small, retired, now we are all old people and I could technically become DACA???

Well f*** that I can find a country that would take me and my millions of Dollars. If I'm not a citizen, I owe no US income tax on anything earned outside of the USA. They can't have it both ways.

I wouldn't lose sleep over it.
Ending birthright citizenship in any form would require a Constitutional amendment, which is pretty close to impossible at this time in history.
To end it retroactively is even closer to impossible.

glennds wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2025 11:34 am I wouldn't lose sleep over it.
Ending birthright citizenship in any form would require a Constitutional amendment, which is pretty close to impossible at this time in history.
To end it retroactively is even closer to impossible.

Understood, but large parts of the Constitution are being ignored already. It's just a document. If the people in power have the wrong motives, anything can happen.

There are actually stories being published online about the possibility of generations of people in the US suddenly becoming Stateless... exactly what could happen to me in a worst-case scenario. This happens in various countries around the world.

My kids could stay (their Mother is a American descended from early English settlers), my one living parent could stay (she's naturalized), but if we take the EO at face value, I would have to leave.

ochotona wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2025 12:05 pm

glennds wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2025 11:34 am I wouldn't lose sleep over it.
Ending birthright citizenship in any form would require a Constitutional amendment, which is pretty close to impossible at this time in history.
To end it retroactively is even closer to impossible.

Understood, but large parts of the Constitution are being ignored already. It's just a document. If the people in power have the wrong motives, anything can happen.

Thanks, now I'll lose some sleep because I'm basically in the same boat as you, just without the millions of dollars!

Without even trying we found two people on the forum who theoretically are at risk.

The more sinister interpretation, which I can't put past them, is that they tailored the EO to affect Kamala Harris.

Seems like the EO only applies to people who are born within the United States after 30 days from the date of the order.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential ... tizenship/

flyingpylon wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2025 1:18 pm Seems like the EO only applies to people who are born within the United States after 30 days from the date of the order.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential ... tizenship/

Well... that helps me, I guess. But it's still badly written. If you're here on a H1-B, your kid born here isn't an American. They might end up Stateless?

I would like to think common sense will apply, and I think it will. Sure, that could turn out to be a naive thought.

I made friends with a Chinese couple who lived here for a while, went to school, had their baby here, taking full advantage of the health care system, and scrammed. Mission accomplished. I hope that Trump’s “scary” tactics will discourage such behavior in the future, but as for those who actually build a long-term life here, I would like to see their children granted citizenship.
Worse case scenario, one just has to sweat out the next four years.

dualstow wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2025 2:11 pm I would like to think common sense will apply, and I think it will. Sure, that could turn out to be a naive thought.

I made friends with a Chinese couple who lived here for a while, went to school, had their baby here, taking full advantage of the health care system, and scrammed. Mission accomplished. I hope that Trump’s “scary” tactics will discourage such behavior in the future, but as for those who actually build a long-term life here, I would like to see their children granted citizenship.
Worse case scenario, one just has to sweat out the next four years.

US tech industry staffing via H1-B depends on exactly that kind of arbitrage... the US harvesting the fruits of Indian and Chinese and European education. Then not spending on education for American kids. Turnabout is fair play?

I'm not sure what you mean that this couple "took advantage" of anything...

If they were graduate students, they worked in what amounts to low-pay indentured servitude to their Professor / Department as RAs or TAs or Post-Docs. I know, I was an RA and TA in grad school, and their work furthered US science and the career of said Professor / Department.

If they participated in the healthcare system, they paid for it. Nowhere in the 50 States does that get given away for free, unless you're on Medicaid, but grad students don't get Medicaid.

If they decided at the end of their education that the long-term fit wasn't right, I don't fault them at all. Win-win or no deal. Also, if Chinese are educated in the West, and they bring their experience back home with them, and hopefully it was a good one, that's good public relations for America.

I think one of the best things for young people is to go abroad and live and study for a time. It really changes your outlook. Unfortunately, not many Americans have the opportunity to do that, unless they are wearing camo and carrying an M-16.

But I get that having a kid here on a tourist trip or illegal trip is gaming the system.

This just in:

SEATTLE, Jan 23 (Reuters) - A federal judge blocked Donald Trump's administration on Thursday from implementing the Republican president's executive order curtailing the right to automatic birthright citizenship in the United States, calling it "blatantly unconstitutional."

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-jud ... 025-01-23/

glennds wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2025 2:43 pm This just in:

SEATTLE, Jan 23 (Reuters) - A federal judge blocked Donald Trump's administration on Thursday from implementing the Republican president's executive order curtailing the right to automatic birthright citizenship in the United States, calling it "blatantly unconstitutional."

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-jud ... 025-01-23/

All part of the process and to be expected. This will be for the Supreme Court to decide.

glennds wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2025 11:34 am I wouldn't lose sleep over it.
Ending birthright citizenship in any form would require a Constitutional amendment, which is pretty close to impossible at this time in history.
To end it retroactively is even closer to impossible.

I heard some judge today say that this may one of the most easily overturned Executive Actions in history.

glennds wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2025 2:43 pm This just in:

SEATTLE, Jan 23 (Reuters) - A federal judge blocked Donald Trump's administration on Thursday from implementing the Republican president's executive order curtailing the right to automatic birthright citizenship in the United States, calling it "blatantly unconstitutional."

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-jud ... 025-01-23/

That is what I must of heard. Was not paying close enough attention to note if that judge was one who had jurisdiction over the matter.

ochotona wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2025 2:25 pm I'm not sure what you mean that this couple "took advantage" of anything...

Not in the sense of cheating. That’s why I wrote “full advantage of.”
Ironically, my wife has been taking advantage of the Chinese health care system (and paying). Call it medical tourism, although as a citizen she’s not exactly a tourist.

However, they were taking up a hospital bed and facilities with no plans to stay.

Here is an article offering legal support of the executive order.

https://mailchi.mp/tomwoods/birthright?e=f224a7b5b6

What was meant by the clause was that you had to be subject to no other sovereign.

Senator Jacob Howard drafted the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Here is what he said it meant: "This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons." (Emphasis added.)

I Shrugged wrote: ↑Fri Jan 24, 2025 7:39 pm Here is an article offering legal support of the executive order.

https://mailchi.mp/tomwoods/birthright?e=f224a7b5b6

What was meant by the clause was that you had to be subject to no other sovereign.

Senator Jacob Howard drafted the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Here is what he said it meant: "This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons." (Emphasis added.)

By that logic, the members of sovereign tribal nations like the Navajo would not have a Constitutional right to birthright citizenship.
But where would they be deported?

See parallel thread ⇢ viewtopic.php?p=256131#p256131

American Indians get their US citizenship via the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 instead of the US Constitution.

flyingpylon wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2025 1:18 pm Seems like the EO only applies to people who are born within the United States after 30 days from the date of the order.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential ... tizenship/

This one / for now, anyways

Yeah, even this one is an unconstitutional change, but, who knows what the future holds

flyingpylon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2025 3:23 pm American Indians get their US citizenship via the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 instead of the US Constitution.

If provisions of the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 and the Constitution (as interpreted or amended) are in conflict, which one controls?

Dieter wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2025 5:08 pm

flyingpylon wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2025 1:18 pm Seems like the EO only applies to people who are born within the United States after 30 days from the date of the order.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential ... tizenship/

This one / for now, anyways

Yeah, even this one is an unconstitutional change, but, who knows what the future holds

Whether it’s unconstitutional or not depends on one’s interpretation of the 14th amendment, specifically the part about being subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. That will likely be decided by the SCOTUS in a couple of years.

The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 recognized that American Indians were not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States so the 14th amendment didn’t apply to them. Congress needed to enact separate legislation to grant them US citizenship. So the argument is that if the 14th amendment didn’t even apply to American Indians, why would it apply to anyone else not subject to the jurisdiction of the US?

But like you said, who knows…

glennds wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2025 6:48 pm

flyingpylon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2025 3:23 pm American Indians get their US citizenship via the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 instead of the US Constitution.

If provisions of the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 and the Constitution (as interpreted or amended) are in conflict, which one controls?

The short answer is I don’t know and anything can happen. I don’t claim to be an expert at any of this, it’s just an interesting situation. Seems like the ICA and the 14th run parallel and wouldn’t conflict but things can change.

I guess we'll all find out together.

It is bizarre though that we would be talking about the birthright citizen status of Native Americans. Talk about paradox.