Hacker News Reader

Comment by JumpCrisscross | Hacker News Reader

> that is obviously the intention of this system

I'm genuinely unsure which way the partisan tilt would lean on American citizens who get unbanked.

I don't even think it's about partisan tilt anymore. This administration's M.O. is raw chaos, havoc, and just this low-level randomized churn that keeps us all conditioned to believe that nothing in government works deterministically anymore.

If they don't have documentation, are they citizens?

It is very, very important to the national psyche of both the UK and the US that the answer to this question can be "yes".

Can you for an outsider expand on this argument. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but why is that?

If the US Constitution is to have force as the core document foundational to the governance of the US, it is important for its clear text to have the force of law.

An executive agency creating new requirements for citizenship has the effect of overriding the Constitution, which brings into question what are the controlling documents for the country.

> All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

This is part of the US constitution. There's no "if they have proper documentation" qualification.

> If they don't have documentation, are they citizens?

Yes. As OP said, "anyone who has changed their name and does not have a notarized copy of the name change certificate, and most people who do not drive." Note that the first category includes many married women.

> which way the partisan tilt would lean on American citizens who get unbanked.

Obviously the court of Fox public opinion would examine their social media to determine if they're woke or Hispanic before deciding this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com