Must See: Mark Levin Delivers His Opening Statement on Impeachment

  1. Oooohh

He is bright. So are all of the pundits. His statements (just as with any other pundit) at times do not coincide with reality.

Well, it’s been 20 minutes since you posted it, and the video you posted is 38 minutes, so…

FYI very few people here sit and watch a 38 minute video that someone posts here, so…

1 Like

I’m not wrong. He is.

Birthright citizenship has applied to every child born on US soil, with the exception of the children of diplomats (and for a short time, native Americans born on reservations), no matter the nationality of their parents, since the ratification of the 14th.

The Supreme Court ruled as such in the 1890s.

1 Like

I know a lot of little girls who have more Huevos then some men.

Those who wrote it and voted for it explicitly said it would cover them during debates. The point was made for the CRA of 1866 and then the 14th.

Levin is talking about illegal alien’s children. They have no right to be citizens. My thread is going off topic with this. Here you go:

In my best impression of another poster on this board…

You have absolutely no evidence to back that claim up.

2 Likes

If they are born on US soil, they are American Citizens - whether or not you or Mark Levin think they have a “right” to be.

This is well-settled law.

What’s your source for this claim? I can’t seem to find it.

He is extremely bright. What’s your source for your claim?

He is wrong, there is no such exception in the language of the 14th amendment. “All persons born…”

“Well settled“ by a court decision that is reversible by something as simple as another court decision.

1 Like

Of course I do. Name one.

I posted the link on the old forum when this topic came up. I’ll try to see if i can find it.

Thank you. I’ll wait.

Landmark has already prepared a lawsuit that will be filed in federal court the moment the House acts. Such a brazen violation of the core functions of Congress simply cannot be ignored. Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution is clear respecting the manner in which a bill becomes law. Members are required to vote on this bill, not claim they did when they didn’t. The Speaker of the House and her lieutenants are temporary custodians of congressional authority. They are not empowered to do permanent violence to our Constitution,” Levin said.

https://www.sfexaminer.com/national-news/landmark-legal-foundation-readies-constitutional-suit-if-obamacare-passes-with-slaughter-solution/amp/

Thank you.

1 Like

I can almost cite from memory exchanges from the debates on the CRA of 1866 and the 14th where senators like Howard, Trumbull, and Conness explicitly argue that children born in the US to foreigners would be citizens. The only exceptions were children of diplomats (they carry their native soil with them, so to speak), children of occupying forces and (at the time) Indians born on Indian land (they were considered “quasi-nations”). They have since been automatically naturalized since 1924 (IIRC).

And your lack of standing claim?

While this is a true statement, it is also a meaningless one, because the same could be said for any court case.

Let me put it this way:

Wong Kim Ark has the same precedential strength, and likelyhood of being overturned, as Brown v. Board of Education or Marbury v. Madison.