Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Trump Plans To Stop Giving Birth To Babies Born In America


Recommended Posts

Oct. 30, 2018 / 9:23 PM EDT
By Danny Cevallos

President Donald Trump says he wants to sign an executive order ending "birthright citizenship" for babies of non-citizens born on U.S. soil.

Most citizens are taught early in their education that birthright citizenship is an immutable, undisputed right, explicitly granted by the Constitution. But, it turns out, birthright citizenship may not be a constitutional right.

 

The Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment — enacted in 1868 — reads "(a)ll 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."OCT. 30, 201802:20

 
 

If the clause simply omitted "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" then there would likely be no debate, and birthright citizenship would be unassailable absent a constitutional amendment. But the "subject to the jurisdiction" language has created a lot of debate over the years.

To some scholars, birthright citizenship has been the result of an accidental interpretation of the Constitution, federal law and Supreme Court precedent — an error that they believe can be corrected without Constitutional amendment.

Shortly after the passage of the 14th Amendment, the Supreme Court in 1872 had an opportunity to interpret it in the "Slaughterhouse Cases," observing that the amendment's "main purpose was to establish the citizenship of" African-Americans. It also concludedthat "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was meant to exclude the children of "ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign states born within the United States."

 

The argument goes: If these categories of people were not "subject to the jurisdiction" then it follows that babies born of illegal immigrants have even less claim to citizenship.

But then, in 1898, the Supreme Court decided U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, holding that "a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, were subjects of the emperor of China, but have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States" was entitled to citizenship based on his birth on American soil.

This case, together with the clear meaning of every other part of the Citizenship Clause — except for that tricky "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" part — form the bulk of the strongest arguments for birthright citizenship: To supporters, it's in the 14th Amendment, and the Supreme Court appears to have squarely decided the issue.

But maybe it didn't. The Wong Kim Ark case did not actually decide whether children of illegal immigrants are entitled to birthright citizenship — only children of immigrant parents with "permanent domicile" in the United States.

 
Some scholars go further and argue that the Wong Kim Ark decision is completely erroneous, and based on a mistaken interpretation of the 14th Amendment — a mistake that has caused a major constitutional misunderstanding that persists to this day.

Those against birthright citizenship ultimately conclude that while the 14th Amendment Citizenship Clause has been misapplied, it was always intended to grant citizenship only to people who are born here and whose parents are not foreign subjects.

To them, "subject to the jurisdiction" clause is not just some meaningless phrase, because there is a presumption that laws and the Constitution do not contain surplus or meaningless words. For the same reason that children of diplomats and invading armies would not be citizens, children of illegal immigrants should not be either. All of these children are — by this interpretation — not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States.

Those who support birthright citizenship have a more straightforward argument. Whatever "subject to the jurisdiction" ultimately means, it doesn't change the rest of the language of the Citizenship Clause. If that vexing phrase has any limiting meaning, it just refers to the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States —just as someone who commits crimes in interstate commerce is "subject to the jurisdiction" of the U.S. government.

 

Whichever side is right, there's a compelling historical — if not legal — argument for not amending the Constitution to remove birthright citizenship. The Constitution has been amended to expand rights and increase protections. It is rarely amended to remove existing rights.

Arguably, the one time that has occurred in our history was the 18th Amendment, which imposed a federal criminal prohibition on alcohol. By any measure, that was ultimately a spectacularly unsuccessful amendment.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Theseus said:
 

Whichever side is right, there's a compelling historical — if not legal — argument for not amending the Constitution to remove birthright citizenship.

 

after the author states all the history as to why the 14th amendment is not about birthright citizenship, save for the slaves, he writes this tripe. There is no anchor baby amendment in the Constitution, the fourteenth amendment was purely for those children of the slaves to give blanket citizenship to them. They had no allegiance to a previous foreign entity and permanently resided in the USA. The jurisdiction clause was put in for this sole reason. The Cara-invaders from Central America are shown walking with their flag. 90% of them aren't claiming legitimate asylum rather they are coming for the economic benefit in the form of being a state charge and seeking low wage jobs. This is not asylum and there is no "credible fear'. If they want better wages and jobs create them in the country to which they carry their flag as they march upon a foreign land. Hey I would like to be the Candyman but there is only so much candy in the world to make the world go round. Or as Jesus said (paraphrasing), teach 'em to fish, not to feed 'em. Or as my dog would say, where is the food? Ah, he has the food keep going back to him. Quit putting the food out and they will go away!

 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Theseus said:

 Hey I would like to be the Candyman but there is only so much candy in the world to make the world go round. Or as Jesus said (paraphrasing), teach 'em to fish, not to feed 'em. Or as my dog would say, where is the food? Ah, he has the food keep going back to him. Quit putting the food out and they will go away!

***///

Bravo, BIRD:tiphat:Well said !  :twothumbs:

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Theseus said:

Or as Jesus said (paraphrasing), teach 'em to fish, not to feed 'em. Or as my dog would say, where is the food? Ah, he has the food keep going back to him. Quit putting the food out and they will go away!

 

 

 

Or as Moses said (paraphrasing).....keep walkin, we're almost there.   :huh:

 

GO RV, then BV

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/3/2018 at 10:48 AM, Theseus said:

Shabby dabby doo 

Couldn't get up to go to the loo,

Constipated was he,

Created an angry soul in he

He pushed and pushed, a bit,

But only found out he was a little ole ...

 

Oh my, very creative Theseus.  I'd be curious to know what color crayon you used to compose the original draft.....I'm guessing yellow.  ;)

 

GO RV, then BV  

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

Oh my, very creative Theseus.  I'd be curious to know what color crayon you used to compose the original draft.....I'm guessing yellow.  ;)

 

GO RV, then BV  

Well thank you Shabby dabby doo. I CAN be very creative. Too bad the same cannot be said about you.

 

<clap>

 

I got spirit!

 

Yes I do!

 

How about you?

 

👆

 

 

  • Haha 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here we see the masterful stroke of Trump's campaigning for the Senators of the United States. While the left celebrates their small victory in the House what Trump has accomplished in the Senate is masterful and something very few people saw coming. Although I may be wrong in its origin the premise is sound. The origin of this stems from the slow confirmation process culminating with the shameful process Kavanagh went through to get nominated. A little background is in order. First, it requires a simple majority to confirm almost all the justices that are vacant or have been waiting to be voted on by the Senate. The Dems have been stonewalling these and some of Trump's cabinet. With a greater than 51 Republicans in the Senate now, these confirmations can be voted on with unprecedented speed given this administration. Also, should another SCOTUS justice fall, the confirmation process would not go through the sham it went through the last time. Just bring it the floor of the Senate and vote. This has the potential to shape not only SCOTUS bt all federal judgeship positions that appointed by the President for many many years to come. And in the winning lap running the Dems are doing they are slowing coming to this conclusion. Not only has the blue wave been halted in the Senate, but also judicial legislation by left-leaning activist judges have been severely hampered. Sure let the AGs sue Trump but it will be his appointees that will hear the arguments and adjudicate according to the United States Constitution and not based on what the judge feels should be law. And with the distraction of the House race, Trump wins in the end. WInning. Elections have consequences right Shabs? Oh you can change your diapers now that you have been explained what is really happening with the Senate and elections. Winning.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Theseus said:

Here we see the masterful stroke of Trump's campaigning for the Senators of the United States. While the left celebrates their small victory in the House what Trump has accomplished in the Senate is masterful and something very few people saw coming. Although I may be wrong in its origin the premise is sound. The origin of this stems from the slow confirmation process culminating with the shameful process Kavanagh went through to get nominated. A little background is in order. First, it requires a simple majority to confirm almost all the justices that are vacant or have been waiting to be voted on by the Senate. The Dems have been stonewalling these and some of Trump's cabinet. With a greater than 51 Republicans in the Senate now, these confirmations can be voted on with unprecedented speed given this administration. Also, should another SCOTUS justice fall, the confirmation process would not go through the sham it went through the last time. Just bring it the floor of the Senate and vote. This has the potential to shape not only SCOTUS bt all federal judgeship positions that appointed by the President for many many years to come. And in the winning lap running the Dems are doing they are slowing coming to this conclusion. Not only has the blue wave been halted in the Senate, but also judicial legislation by left-leaning activist judges have been severely hampered. Sure let the AGs sue Trump but it will be his appointees that will hear the arguments and adjudicate according to the United States Constitution and not based on what the judge feels should be law. And with the distraction of the House race, Trump wins in the end. WInning. Elections have consequences right Shabs? Oh you can change your diapers now that you have been explained what is really happening with the Senate and elections. Winning.

 

That's a nice theory with some serious food for thought.  That said, the immediate firing of Sessions before all the midterm ballots were counted shows just how paranoid Donald has become.  He's wizzin' down his leg and scrambling to cover his backside while he still can.....He knows the hammer falls after the first of the year.  Collusion, emoluments clause, sexual assault accusations just got their voices back.  Sure, he'll have the senate majority for protection, but when the facts are revealed only his base will remain imbedded....those on the fence will walk away from him.  Let's be clear here, Trump gets every speck of credit for the massive voter turnout in this election and though he did indeed add to his senate numbers, he also managed to lose the house while the economy is on blast and unemployment is staggeringly low....Only an epic divider can do that sort of thing when everybody is supposedly doing so well.  But sure, let's go with your "winning" story.

 

As to your recent responses to me referencing sh*t and this latest diapers comment.....it seems you've developed an infatuation with poo.  You should look into that before it turns into something debilitating.

 

GO RV, then BV  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

That's a nice theory with some serious food for thought.  That said, the immediate firing of Sessions before all the midterm ballots were counted shows just how paranoid Donald has become.  He's wizzin' down his leg and scrambling to cover his backside while he still can....

Must be talking about the guy on MSNBC Chris Matthews. He is notorious for leg shaking and peeing down his leg.

 

.He knows the hammer falls after the first of the year.  Collusion, emoluments clause, sexual assault accusations just got their voices back. 

there is no evidence for collusion. Emoulments clause was taken care of.  

 

 

Sure, he'll have the senate majority for protection, but when the facts are revealed only his base will remain imbedded....

Only facts you have are conjecture and that is only good in your small brain.

 

those on the fence will walk away from him.  Let's be clear here, Trump gets every speck of credit for the massive voter turnout in this election and though he did indeed add to his senate numbers, he also managed to lose the house while the economy is on blast and unemployment is staggeringly low

And your homeboy the former POSPOTUS lost the most seats in the house during his first term.

....Only an epic divider can do that sort of thing when everybody is supposedly doing so well.  But sure, let's go with your "winning" story.

The only dividers will be the House members that seek to investigate.

As to your recent responses to me referencing sh*t and this latest diapers comment.....it seems you've developed an infatuation with poo.  You should look into that before it turns into something debilitating.

That poo is you! because you are so full of it

GO RV, then BV  

6

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

That's a nice theory with some serious food for thought.  That said, the immediate firing of Sessions before all the midterm ballots were counted shows just how paranoid Donald has become.  He's wizzin' down his leg and scrambling to cover his backside while he still can.....He knows the hammer falls after the first of the year.  Collusion, emoluments clause, sexual assault accusations just got their voices back.  Sure, he'll have the senate majority for protection, but when the facts are revealed only his base will remain imbedded....those on the fence will walk away from him.  Let's be clear here, Trump gets every speck of credit for the massive voter turnout in this election and though he did indeed add to his senate numbers, he also managed to lose the house while the economy is on blast and unemployment is staggeringly low....Only an epic divider can do that sort of thing when everybody is supposedly doing so well.  But sure, let's go with your "winning" story.

 

As to your recent responses to me referencing sh*t and this latest diapers comment.....it seems you've developed an infatuation with poo.  You should look into that before it turns into something debilitating.

 

GO RV, then BV  

 

 I have to agree with you "it" is going to hit the fan soon.... I believe it will be different than what you think...... The Obama DOJ is going to be exposed for all the corruption and illegalities that they committed.... Many have already quit or been fired.... But the true depth of the corruption will be exposed soon...... Yes Trump did wait until after the midterms .....the house cleaning begins now..... As well as the subpoena's.....big changes coming...... We'll just have to see if it goes your way ,or my way.......Cheers

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.