gatomontes99 Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 (edited) 14th Amendment 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 that any kid, born within our borders, is a citizen is invalid. The low hanging fruit of this controversial subject is tourists. Especially birth right tourists. Coming to America just to have a baby is not protected or guaranteed by the 14th. Residency is a requirement. The more difficult argument is illegal aliens that stay in the US for a prolonged period and have children. Have they established residency. The Trump argument is that if you don't establish legal residency than you don't have residency and cannot confer citizenship. Everyone else is saying if you happen to give birth inside the borders, it's the same as if a citizen gave birth. In a perfect world, I would have no problem with the everyone else's argument. However, birth tourism and illegal aliens giving birth to children as anchor babies creates a set of problems that need to be addressed. I don't think an E.O. is the best solution. Congress needs to create a law that specifies what residency constitutes. Residency should be defined as legally established in the United States for a minimum of 1 year. Edited April 3 by gatomontes99 Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
August1991 Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 Here is Ann Coulter's interpretation of the 14th Amendment: https://anncoulter.substack.com/p/600000-men-died-for-anchor-babies Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 (edited) I like this part from Coulter: Quote Trump's most important executive order is the one that returns to the American people the ability to determine who becomes a citizen. The way things are now, that decision is put in the hands of illegal aliens, who are here against our will and in violation of our laws or -- in the case of birth tourism -- in the hands of the Chinese government. Edited April 3 by bush_cheney2004 3 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
August1991 Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 Facing the PQ, Pierre Trudeau changed Canada's Citizenship law in 1976. The PQ then decided that voter/residence required a health card. Quote
August1991 Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 In Canada, in federal and provincial elections, I show up, show my ID to people, it's checked and I vote for one candidate - one X. (I know the story.) In municipal elections, in Montreal, same process but several names for a X. (I'm confused.) ====== The US voting system reminds me of our Census form. I receive it in the mail. It has many choices. I usually throw our Canadian census form in the garbage. Quote
Nationalist Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 The 14th amendment was created to accommodate slaves. Its been abused for decades. The US needs to change the law to be much more restrictive and reasonable. However Demoncrats vehemently oppose this because it would remove voters for them. That's the long and the short of it and it makes the mid-terms even more important. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Deluge Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 12 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: 14th Amendment 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 that any kid, born within our borders, is a citizen is invalid. The low hanging fruit of this controversial subject is tourists. Especially birth right tourists. Coming to America just to have a baby is not protected or guaranteed by the 14th. Residency is a requirement. The more difficult argument is illegal aliens that stay in the US for a prolonged period and have children. Have they established residency. The Trump argument is that if you don't establish legal residency than you don't have residency and cannot confer citizenship. Everyone else is saying if you happen to give birth inside the borders, it's the same as if a citizen gave birth. In a perfect world, I would have no problem with the everyone else's argument. However, birth tourism and illegal aliens giving birth to children as anchor babies creates a set of problems that need to be addressed. I don't think an E.O. is the best solution. Congress needs to create a law that specifies what residency constitutes. Residency should be defined as legally established in the United States for a minimum of 1 year. The 14th simply needs to be clarified - remove all trace of anything that could even suggest that aliens can legally visit this country or illegal aliens can break into this country and drop precious little offspring citizens. 1 Quote
robosmith Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 11 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said: I like this part from Coulter: Except that EO has NO POWER to change the Constitution. Everyone ELSE knows that. Do you understand that a Constitutional AMMENDMENT is REQUIRED? Coulter is like Trump: LIES all the time and the RepubliCONS eat up her red meat. LMAO Quote
robosmith Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 7 hours ago, Nationalist said: The 14th amendment was created to accommodate slaves. Its been abused for decades. Nope. Many others involved. Your IGNORANCE strikes out again. 7 hours ago, Nationalist said: The US needs to change the law to be much more restrictive and reasonable. Canuck OPINIONS don't count. 7 hours ago, Nationalist said: However Demoncrats vehemently oppose this because it would remove voters for them. ^IGNORANCE AGAIN. Anchor babies can't vote. 7 hours ago, Nationalist said: That's the long and the short of it and it makes the mid-terms even more important. LMAO at dropout. Quote
Nationalist Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 9 minutes ago, robosmith said: Nope. Many others involved. Your IGNORANCE strikes out again. Canuck OPINIONS don't count. ^IGNORANCE AGAIN. Anchor babies can't vote. LMAO at dropout. Yes Liar Dear... Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
robosmith Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 1 minute ago, Nationalist said: Yes Liar Dear... ^BUPKIS strikes out again. 1 Quote
gatomontes99 Posted April 3 Author Report Posted April 3 1 hour ago, robosmith said: Except that EO has NO POWER to change the Constitution. Everyone ELSE knows that. Do you understand that a Constitutional AMMENDMENT is REQUIRED? Coulter is like Trump: LIES all the time and the RepubliCONS eat up her red meat. LMAO You need to read the 14th. I even posted it in this thread. There is an assumption that those that are given citizenship, as a birth right, are domiciled here. I even put it in bold. Trump saying that tourists don't get citizenship upon birth is aligned with the 14th. Trump saying illegal aliens are not domiciled because they are in the country illegally is more of a stretch. But, the interpretation relies on the wording of the 14th, so no new amendment is required. Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
User Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 It is simply absurd to think anyone at the time of passing the 14th Amendment was honestly trying to say that if a pregnant woman stepped illegally across the border and plopped out a baby that it was then an American citizen no questions asked. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 4 hours ago, robosmith said: Except that EO has NO POWER to change the Constitution. Everyone ELSE knows that. Didn't stop Obama and DACA to allow illegals to stay in the USA....all by EO. Quote Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is a 2012 executive action by President Obama that shields eligible undocumented young immigrants ("Dreamers") from deportation and provides renewable two-year work permits. It requires applicants to have arrived before age 16, passed background checks, and be in school or veterans. ...Federal courts, notably in Texas, have repeatedly ruled that the 2012 Obama-era DACA executive action is unlawful, arguing it violates the Administrative Procedure Act and exceeds executive authority by creating law rather than exercising discretion. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
robosmith Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 (edited) 18 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Didn't stop Obama and DACA to allow illegals to stay in the USA....all by EO. Nothing illegal about allowing ASYLUM CLAIMS and DACA was legalized for renewals. When a judge gives an immigrant a court date for their asylum claim HEARING, they are NOT here ILLEGALLY. Edited April 3 by robosmith Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 Just now, robosmith said: Nothing illegal about allowing ASYLUM CLAIMS and DACA was legalized. When a judge gives an immigrant a court date for their asylum claim HEARING, they are NOT here ILLEGALLY. Illegal and unconstitutional....judges have already ruled. But wait...TRUMP ! Obama EOs GOOD...Trump EO's...BAD !!! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
robosmith Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 4 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Illegal and unconstitutional....judges have already ruled. But wait...TRUMP ! Obama EOs GOOD...Trump EO's...BAD !!! Trump's EO is a direct violation of the 14th amendment. Allowing ASYLUM claims is common law. Quote Asylum is a legal right, not merely common law, established under both U.S. statutory law and international conventions for individuals fearing persecution. The Refugee Act of 1980 (incorporated into US code) and the 1967 UN Protocol require the U.S. to consider asylum claims from those present at the border or within the country, ensuring protection for those fleeing on account of race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or social group. [1, 2, 3] Legal Basis: Seeking asylum is legal under U.S. and international law for people facing persecution. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 6 minutes ago, robosmith said: Trump's EO is a direct violation of the 14th amendment. Allowing ASYLUM claims is common law. DACA is not common law...Obama violated the constitution and you just won't admit it...because...TRUMP !!! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
robosmith Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: DACA is not common law...Obama violated the constitution and you just won't admit it...because...TRUMP !!! There is nothing in the Constitution about deporting child immigrants, and that's why you've posted NO EVIDENCE. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 (edited) 2 minutes ago, robosmith said: There is nothing in the Constitution about deporting child immigrants, and that's why you've posted NO EVIDENCE. Evidence is provided in multiple court rulings...but you will ignore that...because > TRUMP !!! Quote Federal courts, particularly in Texas, have repeatedly ruled that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program is unlawful . These rulings argue that the executive branch exceeded its authority by creating the program without congressional approval, making it an unconstitutional or unlawful action. Key DACA Legal Rulings 2023 Ruling: A federal judge declared DACA unlawful, finding it circumvented federal immigration law and created a void due to Congress's inaction. Appeals Court Decision: The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed that DACA is unlawful and a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Scope: While deemed unlawful, courts have allowed existing DACA renewals to continue, limiting the impact of the injunction while prohibiting new applications. Supreme Court Position: In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled that the attempt to rescind DACA was arbitrary and capricious, but it did not rule on the legality of the program itself. Edited April 3 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
robosmith Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Evidence is provided in multiple court rulings...but you will ignore that...because > TRUMP !!! Trump ignores SO MANY District Court rulings but you have nothing to say about that. 🤮 Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 1 minute ago, robosmith said: Trump ignores SO MANY District Court rulings but you have nothing to say about that. 🤮 Don't care either way, except to point out your inconsistencies...because....TRUMP !!! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
robosmith Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 (edited) 3 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Don't care either way, except to point out your inconsistencies...because....TRUMP !!! Your FALSE EQUIVALENCES, and Trump's violations are MUCH WORSE. Which you will discover when the SCOTUS RULES. Edited April 3 by robosmith Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 3 Report Posted April 3 3 minutes ago, robosmith said: Your FALSE EQUIVALENCES, and Trump's violations are MUCH WORSE. Which you will discover when the SCOTUS RULES. Sure...SCOTUS is going to rule that all illegals can stay...because...TRUMP !!! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
gatomontes99 Posted April 3 Author Report Posted April 3 35 minutes ago, robosmith said: Nothing illegal about allowing ASYLUM CLAIMS and DACA was legalized for renewals. That is not what DACA was. DACA was an order to not prosecute illegal aliens that were underage when they were brought crossed the border. 37 minutes ago, robosmith said: When a judge gives an immigrant a court date for their asylum claim HEARING, they are NOT here ILLEGALLY. No. They are still here illegally. They are supposed to be detained until a hearing. The hearing determines if the asylum defense is valid. Biden issued an EO to allow asylum seekers to be released, in violation of the law. 1 Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
Recommended Posts
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.