Every day trump moves further away from Reagan's Shining City on a Hill (which he derived from the salt and light parable from Jesus' Sermon on the Mount). JFK first coined the phrase... But Reagan's use was equally eloquent...
The Democrats (Soon to be led by Bernie's campaign) better get these next 7 months right. There is no reason why the Democratic nominee can have a bad enough campaign to lose to a clear Nazi wannabee.
That's exactly the point. Seems pretty clear to me. It already started with the naturalized citizens that got their citizenship through family members serving in the military or serving themselves. This department is designed to take those cases and implement them on a broad scale to remove legal citizens by stripping their citizenship. The Supreme Court I'm sure will bend over backwards to let Trump do this. Every hard line white nationalist thing he's done so far the Roberts 5 has green lit. No reason to think they won't do the same here, and it will take a Democratic Presidency and a super majority Democratic Congress to write into law a bill that strikes down this inevitable supreme court decision.
Yeah they already tried. Denied people passports. Saying thier legal birth certificates are not good enough. Soon they will revoke their citizenship. Bad enough they are denying passports
I'm not totally cool with the law as it now stands. If you materially misrepresented yourself in the application, then fine. But once you're a citizen, you should be a full citizen like any other. If you get convicted after naturalization of a crime you committed before naturalization, I'd rather have that citizen rot in an American jail as one of our own. Also, according to the New York Daily News: Naturalized citizens can lose citizenship if they affiliate with a communist, totalitarian or terrorist organization within five years of naturalizing, or are dishonorably discharged from the military before five years of service. https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-l-chapter-2 I think that's messed up. But the department itself is just going to do the work we've already been doing anyway. It does signal something about our priorities.
I wouldn't have a problem either. But yea, that's a big IF. "On July 9, 2018, the Miami Herald reported that the DOJ sued to denaturalize Norma Borgono, a 63-year-old grandmother from Peru, for committing naturalization fraud by not divulging her role in a fraud scheme. As the secretary of an export company, Borgono prepared paperwork for her boss who stole money by using doctored loan applications. Borgono did not make money during the scheme beyond her salary and cooperated with the FBI to put her former boss in jail. The DOJ claims Borgono should have divulged her participation in the criminal offense in her naturalization application, even though she was not yet charged with the crime when she applied for citizenship. Borgono’s story highlights how the federal government is currently broadly interpreting its authority to denaturalize new Americans." https://immigrationforum.org/article/fact-sheet-on-denaturalization/
I’m okay with it until there’s a reason to worry. The Department cites several cases where denaturalizations were authorized in federal court for unique circumstances. I’m not a firm believer in “slippery slopes” both sides use that argument too often to stunt otherwise good actions/legislation/goals/etc. if Obama has created this department I doubt people would care. But it’s Trump so of course we’re worried. I’ll reserve judgment in the interim.
Obama would not create this department, that's kind of the point. Do you think this issue is so rampant that it needs a whole new department?
Maybe, maybe not. There are probably a lot of federal resources that go into investigating these claims, even if they’re few and far between. I trust federal judges. It’s not as if Trump is in a robe calling the shots. The day that due process is denied is the day I’ll be protesting though
