Phil Labonte

You would not.

He's saying, no, it's just going to go forward, not retroactively.

That's not what they argued.

Yeah, just from now, they're not going to denaturalize.

But legally speaking, if you're going to overturn birthright citizenship, it would make much more sense to remove the citizenship of people who are birthright citizens than to just say going forward.

Do you not agree?

Why?

I don't personally.

Explain.

Because if you're saying birthright citizenship is illegitimate and the analysis of the 14th Amendment that's been going on for like whatever, 80 years, however, is wrong, then all those people who had currently been regarded as citizenship through birthright citizenship should retroactively not be regarded as citizens.

Why?

Because it was never correct law to begin with.

Are you opposed to people who are the citizens as a result of birthright tourism to have their citizenship stripped?

Within a certain timeframe.

What's that?

What do you mean?

What do you mean?

You didn't even know what I was going to say.

You said that's not, and then I responded, it is.

I didn't finish the sentence.