It would not require a constitutional convention, it would require a constitutional amendment.
And the odds that it would get one are quite small. If they were better, the amendments of this sort already proposed would have been endorsed by at least one of the major parties. But they haven't.
This country does, in fact NEED immigrants. That is how we have managed to make so many advances in computers and engineering, by luring people from India and China and Europe and of course the other countries in this hemisphere who want to be Americans and want their children to also be Americans.
Pass that amendment, and suddenly, Canada has a major advantage over us. It already has an advantage, because Canada requires far less paperwork and documentation.
You may continue to live in the fantasy world where words do not mean what they say. I could give a rat's ass, because you are wrong and time will prove that you are wrong.
The rest of Trump's policy is okay, except it is very vague in parts.
If it depends on revoking birthright citizenship it is Dead on Arrival.
The Constitution says nothing at al, about marriage, but you yutzes ranyed on and on about hos the dictionary is the ultimate authority about how all marriages must be between a man and a woman.
Now the shoe is on the other foot, and the Constitution suddenly does not mean what it says, it must be "interpreted" to mane what you clowns want it to say.
Here is what will really happen:
Congress will pass no law revoking birthright citizenship. The votes are not there. It they had been there, they would have passed it already and made Obama veto it just for show and to prove that they are great swinging dicks, as they did when the revoked the ACA a bazillion times with no results.
In the very unlikely case that they did pass such a law, it would immediately be challenged, and it would not be implemented finding a ruling of the Court. In the interim, thousands of Chinese, Indians, and others would try to get in before it is too late and the number of "anchor babies" would quadruple or more.
The changes are that the lower courts would rule it unconstitutional and the Supremes would refuse to even hear it.
If they did hear it, they would rule it unconstitutional, because it says what it says: anyone born here is a fucking citizen, and even MORE "anchor babies" would be born as citizens.
Then you furriner-hating clowns, yokels and hicks would try to get a constitutional amendment passed, but by then there would be even less of a chance of it passing.
Every years the number of people who oppose this sort of exclusionary stuff are greater. I will admit that there are some advantages to passing such an amendment, just as there advantages to me having my own VTO autogyro, but realistically this is not going to happen. There is a reason why no such law or amendment has not been passed: too many members of the Oligarchy oppose it, for many different reasons.
