Where is the executive order?
So the president lied or he doesnât understand our constitution⌠or both?
1 Like
What words of the president are you referring to? LINK?
JWK
There is no surer way to weaken, subdue and then conquer a prosperous and freedom loving people than by importing the worldâs poverty stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, criminal and diseased populations into that country and making the countryâs existing citizens tax-slaves to support the economic needs of such an invasion.
JWK
There is no surer way to weaken, subdue and then conquer a prosperous and freedom loving people than by importing the worldâs poverty stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, criminal and diseased populations into that country, and making the countryâs existing citizens tax-slaves to support the economic needs of such invaders.
Birthright citizenship is NOT in the Constitution or the 14th Amendment. Those who believe that it is, are completely ignoring the phrase âand subject to the jurisdiction thereofâ. That phrase does not simply mean that those here illegally must obey our lawsâŚthey have already broken the law by coming here illegally. What is meant is ânot owing allegiance to anybody elseâ. It should be interpreted in the same way as the requirement of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, which afforded citizenship to âall persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power.â There should be no such thing as birthright citizenship for children born here of parents here illegally, because the parents and child still owe allegiance to the parents home country!
Where is that executive order the president promised? Coming up on 90 days⌠Where is the EO?
The fact is that this issue should have been dealt with by our representatives decades ago when it was realized that this ambiguity in the 14th Ammendment was being used as a means of impoverished women in neighboring countries to put their children in our welfare system to the detriment of the American taxpayer.
How can a fetus break a law?
Lol, no. Everyone except foreign diplomats, their families, and occupying soldiers (and Indians not separated from their tribe, which was remedied by the ICA of 1924) are subject to our jurisdiction when they are on our soil. Fact. The authors of the CRA of 1866 and 14th and those who supported them explicitly said so.
âand subject to the jurisdiction thereofâ its legislative intent
Thank you for your opinion. Now, let us determine the meaning of âand subject to the jurisdiction thereofâ as expressed by those who framed the amendment.
For example, in discussing the proposed 14th Amendment, Senator Howard explains the clear intentions of the 14th Amendment as follows:
The first amendment is to section one, declaring that all "persons born in the United States and Subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside. I do not propose to say anything on that subject except that the question of citizenship has been fully discussed in this body as not to need any further elucidation, in my opinion. This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.(my emphasis) see : Congressional Globe, 39th Congress (1866) pg. 2890
Later, and after the question was repeatedly asked as to who is and who is not a citizen of the United States, Mr. TRUMBULL responds as follows SEE: page 2893, Congressional Globe, 39th Congress (1866)
1st column halfway down
âThe provision is, that âall persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.â That means âsubject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.â . . . âWhat do we mean by âsubject to the jurisdiction of the United States?â Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.â
Mr. Trumbull later emphasizes in crystal clear language that: âIt cannot be said of any Indian who owes allegiance, partial allegiance if you please, to some other Government that he is âsubject to the jurisdiction of the United Statesâ
Mr. JOHNSON then rises to say: ââŚthere is no definition in the Constitution as it now stands as to citizenship. Who is a citizen of the United States is an open questionâŚ.there is no definition as to how citizenship can exist in the United States except through the medium of a citizenship in a State.
âNow, all that this amendment provides is, that all persons born in the United States and not subject to some foreign Powerâfor that, no doubt, is the meaning of the committee who have brought the matter before usâshall be considered as citizens of the United States.â âŚhe then continues ââŚthe amendment says that citizenship may depend upon birth, and I know of no better way to give rise to citizenship than the fact of birth within the territory of the United States, born of parents who at the time were subject to the authority of the United States.â
And then there is John A. Bingham, chief architect of the 14th Amendments first section who considered the proposed national law on citizenship as âsimply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizenâŚâ Cong. Globe, page 1291(March 9, 1866) middle column half way down.
And so, a baby born to a foreign national mother while on American soil is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment, nor becomes a citizen of the United States upon birth.
JWK
There is no surer way to weaken, subdue, demoralize and then conquer a prosperous and freedom loving people than by allowing and encouraging the poverty stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, criminal and diseased populations of other countries to invade that country, and make the countryâs existing citizens tax-slaves to support the economic needs of such invaders.
Why is it taking so long for this executive order? We are at 88 days since Trump declared he was going to end birthright citizenship through executive order.
Good, rather then spending billions on illegal immigration we should start fixing our infrastructure with the billions saved from fixing the illegal immigration problem.
No, that wasnât the precedent that was set, you are leaving out an important facet of that precedent, and the other party controls the senate, so unless democrats can take back the Senate before 2020, you better hope she can hang in there until after that.
Or become productive citizens of the United States.
As pointed out, Kamala Harris is of birthright citizenship.
Donât think the senator is on welfare.
Allan
Yep. The rule now is you only get to appoint justices when you have control of the Senate.
Love it! /s
1 Like
Thatâs what happens when everyone in American can tell you which Justice is conservative or liberal. When the courts are politicized itâs only natural their appointments are as well.
The only parents âowning allegiance to any foreign sovereigntyâ are foreign diplomats and their families, occupying soldiers and Indians not separated from their tribe. Thatâs why we have this thing called âdiplomatic immunity.â They are not subject to our jurisdiction. Everyone. Else. Is.
Or this:
Note here, the racist intent from Cowan to withhold birthright citizenship to only certain âundesirablesâ while Trumbull dispels that ridiculous notion.
Or this:
Which is why we should give up this silly facade about precedent. Donât insult our intelligence, itâs nothing more than politics.
Shoot. If people can support an idiot like Trump just to get a conservative Justice, what wont they do? The right shouldnât have made justices such a central political issue.
2 Likes
This right hereâŚthis is exactly why this country is screwed. Weâve been playing this game of political one-up-manship for decades now. One party does something unprecedented, so the other one upâs the ante the next time they have a chance. Weâre already to the point where either side views the other as literal enemies.
In the eyes of the hard-right, the left are all godless, baby-murdering filthy commies wanting to enslave everyone to marxist ideals. To the far-left, the right are all racist, bible-thumping, misogynist, war-mongering despots, wanting to create a permanent caste society of the wealthy and powerful vs the poor and downtrodden. The parties do this, because its easy to cast people seen in this light as irredeemable and unworthy of mercy.
Electing a Democratic version Trump isnât going to teach Republicans a lesson, or at least not the one youâre hoping for. Its just going to throw another log on the partisan fire and encourage them to retaliate with an even more grotesque figure to lead the party. People never learn that an eye for an eye just leaves the whole world blind.
