Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Birthright citizenship to be eliminated by EO

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by jerp View Post
    I agree with donpablo. Remember how much we hated Obama's executive orders? What he could not get done through congress he did with his pen. That is dangerous and unconstitutional no matter who does it. There has long been a debate about the meaning of this statement in the 14th:

    "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."

    The argument mostly hinges on the original meaning of "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". Some contend that the 14th Amendment was only intended to provide citizenship to children born in the U.S. to lawful permanent residents — not to unauthorized immigrants or those on temporary visas. The court has already ruled that children of immigrants that are legal permanent residence have citizenship. However there has been no ruling on a case specifically involving undocumented immigrants or those with temporary legal status. That will come, I reckon.
    Doesn't seem complicated. Someone here illegally is not subject to the jurisdiction. And when Texansfan says they are then he needs to tell us who exactly is NOT subject... Or why was it put in there then? LOL

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by RiverRat1 View Post
      Doesn't seem complicated. Someone here illegally is not subject to the jurisdiction. And when Texansfan says they are then he needs to tell us who exactly is NOT subject... Or why was it put in there then? LOL

      It was put in there before the internet and before Mexico was even our border nation.
      Everybody in the USA is subject to our laws as soon as they touch our soil.

      And not only illegal aliens have babies here.
      Folks on student visas and even europeans on work visas INTENTIONALLY have kids here so their kids can be Americans.

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by texansfan View Post
        It was put in there before the internet and before Mexico was even our border nation.
        Everybody in the USA is subject to our laws as soon as they touch our soil.

        And not only illegal aliens have babies here.
        Folks on student visas and even europeans on work visas INTENTIONALLY have kids here so their kids can be Americans.
        All the more reason for the SC to interpret the intent of the 14th.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by Ironman View Post
          All the more reason for the SC to interpret the intent of the 14th.
          LoL
          How can you interpret something that was written 200 years ago without current day context?

          So you're ok with those liberal justices "interpreting" the constitution?

          Because I don't think the intent of the 2nd is what many think it is.

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by texansfan View Post
            LoL

            How can you interpret something that was written 200 years ago without current day context?



            So you're ok with those liberal justices "interpreting" the constitution?



            Because I don't think the intent of the 2nd is what many think it is.


            Of course you don't...


            Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by Dale Moser View Post
              Of course you don't...


              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
              I think the 2nd was put in place with the spirit that an average man should be able to hold weapons in order to fight off the government if need be.
              If that is the case, these little peashooters we have are of no match for the artillery that the government has so we need to be able to possess all the bombs, grenades and other high tech stuff the government has in order to make the fight fair if it came down to that.

              There is no way any militia in this country could fight off the us military if the military didn't care.

              They could just bomb us to smithereens
              Use those loud ear piercing vehicles to bring us to our knees

              Comment


                #22
                I believe Mark Levin is one of the best constitutional lawyers of our time and I put a lot of weight in his thought process and how he views the situation according to the constitution. I am a Trump supporter and I think he is onto something and I bet he gets this done.

                Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

                Comment


                  #23
                  So what could "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" possibly mean? It has to include someone. So if not people here illegally then please tell us who?

                  Do you have even one grain of logic in your head?

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by texansfan View Post
                    I think the 2nd was put in place with the spirit that an average man should be able to hold weapons in order to fight off the government if need be.
                    If that is the case, these little peashooters we have are of no match for the artillery that the government has so we need to be able to possess all the bombs, grenades and other high tech stuff the government has in order to make the fight fair if it came down to that.

                    There is no way any militia in this country could fight off the us military if the military didn't care.

                    They could just bomb us to smithereens
                    Use those loud ear piercing vehicles to bring us to our knees
                    Hmmm. Tell that to Afganistan and Vietnam. They seemed to put up a pretty good fight with "peashooters". You can let your buddies have yours. I'll keep mine.

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by texansfan View Post
                      I think the 2nd was put in place with the spirit that an average man should be able to hold weapons in order to fight off the government if need be.
                      And the 1st was put in place when people only had feathers and ink wells.

                      Now the media gets to SELL us news.

                      The invaders from the south could stop our well healed military, just using TV cameras

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by LWC View Post
                        Hmmm. Tell that to Afganistan and Vietnam. They seemed to put up a pretty good fight with "peashooters". You can let your buddies have yours. I'll keep mine.
                        I'm keeping mine too
                        But in both of those wars we went in trying to fight a "pc" war
                        If the shackles would have been removed and we just went all out no country is a match for us

                        Im talking scorched earth
                        If we did that, we would never lose

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by batmaninja View Post
                          And the 1st was put in place when people only had feathers and ink wells.

                          Now the media gets to SELL us news.

                          The invaders from the south could stop our well healed military, just using TV cameras
                          The same can be said of the second amendment.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Originally posted by batmaninja View Post
                            And the 1st was put in place when people only had feathers and ink wells.

                            Now the media gets to SELL us news.

                            The invaders from the south could stop our well healed military, just using TV cameras
                            Pepper spray with lots of rubber bullets and bean bags.

                            Essentially come in riot gear and detain them all right on the border.
                            Quickly process them back to their side of the river.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Originally posted by texansfan View Post
                              I think the 2nd was put in place with the spirit that an average man should be able to hold weapons in order to fight off the government if need be.

                              If that is the case, these little peashooters we have are of no match for the artillery that the government has so we need to be able to possess all the bombs, grenades and other high tech stuff the government has in order to make the fight fair if it came down to that.



                              There is no way any militia in this country could fight off the us military if the military didn't care.



                              They could just bomb us to smithereens

                              Use those loud ear piercing vehicles to bring us to our knees


                              You assume the government would have the support of the military, which it would not.


                              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Originally posted by texansfan View Post
                                Quickly process them back to their side of the river.
                                Can you release an illegal Honduran to say Mexico ? Or do you need to send them all the way back to their home country?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X