In the next 50 years , what are the chances that the 14th Amendment will be repealed ?

[UndertheOcean]

The fact that I am starting to hear about this from Senate candidates rather than just white supremacist websites is starting to scare me.

[Chulanowa]

1. I just want to point out...

The senate candidate is a white supremacist. Just like his daddy.

[CTyankee]

2. I can't predict but it IS a bit frightening and here's why:

historically, amendments to the Constitution have to be immensely popular in order to reach the 2/3 Congress/3/4 states threshold. If this thing catches on it could be a contest that we'd have to worry about and devote LOTS of time and effort to defeat.

However, it would really energize the Hispanic population who would be outraged. However, unless their numbers in state leges don't drastically improve they would be at the mercy of their white state legislators...

[Taverner]

3. Is that fuckwad Rand Paul trying to remove the 14th ammendment?

It wouldn't surprise me...he's a racist scumbag with shit for brains

[Bonhomme Richard]

4. It will be just like abortion. They would have no interest in getting rid of it..

because it is much more valuable to stir up the repug minions. They had the congress, white house, supreme court for 8 years and if they really wanted to get rid of roe wade they could have done it. I said that to a evangelical winger I know and he just looked at me like all of a sudden the lights went on.

[baldguy]

19. Another endless source of revenue for the RW.

[FiveGoodMen]

5. What were the chances that America would start two needless wars and give up the 4th Amendment?

You can never tell these days.

[customerserviceguy]

6. It doesn't have to be repealed

It just has to be re-interpreted. If Kennedy can be persuaded that the children of illegal aliens are not "under the jurisdiction" of the United States, the same way the children of foreign diplomats are not, then Rand Paul gets his wish.

[Posteritatis]

7. It'd take better drugs than SCOTUS can afford for them to make illegal aliens unbound by US law. nt

[customerserviceguy]

9. Not really

there are some clever arguments for this, and they've never been tested in the Supreme Court. Not saying I agree with those arguments, but I am saying that if Kennedy does, this might just happen.

[Posteritatis]

13. Do you really expect the odds of "the law does not apply to these guys" in a ruling to not be 0? nt

[CTyankee]

10. I think an amendment to the Constitution needs another amendment to the Constitution to

repeal it, just like Prohibition.

[customerserviceguy]

12. Normally, yes

but if there is alleged (and shown) to be some vagueness, then the SCOTUS can interpret that Amendment (or any other part of the Constitution) any way it is persuaded.

If the Second Amendment were to have been decided that the right of firearm ownership is not an individual right (as it was found to be in the Heller decision) wouldn't that look like a non-Amendment repeal of the Second, to the people who own firearms?

At the time the 14th Amendment was ratified, were there illegal aliens in the United States? Or was it such that anyone who got here could stay here? Or did that Amendment simply deal with the citizenship rights of newly-freed African-Americans, and have no application as to illegal aliens?

The 14th clearly excluded Native Americans that were still living within the jurisdictions of their reservations ("not taxed" was the language used), it took a law passed in 1924 to make them citizens, officially. Congress could pass a law defining the children of illegal aliens as non-citizens under the same rationale. Again, all it would take is a SCOTUS majority to affirm that law as being in harmony with the intent of the 14th Amendment. Section 5 of the Amendment gives Congress the power to make laws relating to the Amendment.

[CTyankee]

16. Bit of a stretch to me. IT seems that the threat of Indian uprisings were

the more fearful consequence back in the day of the 14th amendment. I think it would be harder and therefore another amendment to make the 14th changed. Also, the 14th is revered by many, many Americans...it would be a fight...

[customerserviceguy]

18. Yes, it might be a fight

and it will be one that the President is probably willing to deal with. But even if a Repuke Congress doesn't attach the provision to a defense bill, or something else that the President feels he must sign, we may have a Rethug President who would gladly sign such a law.

Illegal immigration is clearly heating up as an issue in this country. I expect the Republiclowns to run full tilt on it, now that their, "Let's see if we can get the Latino vote," experiment has been abandoned.

[treestar]

14. That would be dangerous, because if arrested for a crime

The illegals could argue that they are not under the jurisdiction of the US, causing a need for extradition even if the crimes occurred in the US.

Bottom line with this is that it is stupid - the people advocating it are not looking at all into unintended consequences.

[Sebastian Doyle]

17. It's already been "re-interpreted" enough already

I.e. the third most useless Supreme Court decision ever, commonly referred to as the "Citizens United" case, which legitimizes the bullshit idea that corporations are "persons" and therefore entitled to "equal protection under the law" as stated in the 14th Amendment.

What's needed is clarification. The 14th Amendment should apply to all persons and "person" should be absolutely defined as a biological human being. And indeed, there should be equal protection under the law for all actual persons.

Which means ALL people born in the US. (and also the marriage equality issue, but that's another thread entirely)

[treestar]

8. As a wedge issue, it's not very sexy

So I predict this cannot be used to sway the masses.

[CTyankee]

11. Oh, I think it is. Fear of the "other" is atavistic and always wins popularly over

rationalism...I hate to say...

[defendandprotect]

15. Well, more likely entire Constitution will be overturned... Ollie North was working on that --

and obviously W had little respect for it -- "just a piece of paper" --

Look at it this way, folks . . .

How much were the treaties with native Americans honored by this same government?

The right wing crooks -- elites/capitalists/organized crime -- are in total charge

of our government and its agencies, our Treasury now --

everything is to be exploited ---

and that includes all of the Constitution!!

[depakid]

20. If the federal government loses influence to the states

there's not a lot to prevent regional differences on things like theocracy, reproductive rights or racial disparities from becoming more and more pronounced.