I don't see SCOTUS allowing this in this context, but they will reaffirm that it is valid during wartime.
Which just means we're going to be in a shooting war in Central America by summer.
this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2025
83 points (97.7% liked)
politics
22535 readers
3686 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The MAGAs will just do what Republicans did long ago, when they declared a "War on Drugs." Most citizens thought it just meant that they were taking the issue seriously, but what it really meant was that by declaring a "War," they could take advantage of numerous policies that were only intended to be used during wartime.
So MAGA will declare a War on Illegal Immigrants, and use that to justify their cruel, unAmerican behavior.
I thought that’s what the silliness with Greenland and Canada was for….
He thinks Europe and the rest of NATO is a bunch of freeloaders, living under (expensive) security provided by the US. All the Canada/Greenland talk is bluster to get Europe to spend money on their own military.
The scary shit is the Birthright Citizenship stuff, and he doesn't even actually care about either "birthright" or "citizenship". What he cares about is the 14th amendment phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof".
The kind of people who are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the US are agents of a foreign government. Generally, we think "diplomat", but the other major group is "enemy combatants". Enemy invaders are not subject to US law, and are not entitled to constitutional protections. They can be targeted by the military. If captured, they can be detained indefinitely (until the conclusion of never-ending hostilities) as POWs, or deported without involving the courts.
He wants to solve the immigration problem with Apache gunships, B-52s, Abrams tanks, and the 82nd airborne, rather than ICE and the courts. If he needs a war to do that, a war we shall have.
I think you're underestimating him. First of all the evidece in fact points towards him actually trying to go through with annexing Greenland. Which he might want for its ressources but it would also put him in a much better position against Canada and since he'd be loathed by all his former allies anyway at this point he might as well go all in. Also none of what's happening is intended to solve the so called immigration problem. It's first and foremost a front for forced labor. And it's not gonna stop at immigrants. If they declare you an enemy combatant and throw you in jail it doesn't matter if you actually are or if your political activism just inconvenienced them. You can't do anything about it because at that point your consitutional protection is already gone.
In totally unrelated news, Clarence Thomas took delivery of a new RV....
That’s a Motor Coach, thank you