Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If that were the case then students from overseas coming to study in the US would be exempt from immigration laws. They aren't.Huh? That doesnt make any sense. Coming here from another country makes you an immigrant. That's kind of the definition of the word.
No... An immigrant is someone who comes here from another country with the intention of staying permanently. Coming here from another country makes you a migrant.
Try again.
This is an academic question, not tethered to reality. Like the Kobayashi Maru. There is always some way to work a case up the judicial ladder.If the lower court can't consider a matter
So they don't come here when they come here?If that were the case then students from overseas coming to study in the US would be exempt from immigration laws. They aren't.Huh? That doesnt make any sense. Coming here from another country makes you an immigrant. That's kind of the definition of the word.
No... An immigrant is someone who comes here from another country with the intention of staying permanently. Coming here from another country makes you a migrant.
Try again.
Again... EVERYONE is subject to US laws, including you and I. Just because it is a law that doesn't necessarily apply to you doesn't mean you are exempt from it. Students coming from overseas to study are not immigrants. They are non-immigrants.
Synth things the "Bill of Rights" is something you get in the mail every month you'ev got to pay.This is an academic question, not tethered to reality. Like the Kobayashi Maru. There is always some way to work a case up the judicial ladder.If the lower court can't consider a matter
Keep thinking that, there's only a few instances where the supremes have original jurisdiction. Try reading the Constitution occasionally.
Oh, I thought it was going to be a re-naming of a post office in Reagan's honor. But this is close.What bill was that?Also as far as Cruz introducing a bill, the last one he introduce passed both houses unanimously and your dear leader signed it.
What's wrong smarty pants, is your google broke?
Senate votes to bar Iran's UN pick from entering US | Fox News
A showboat bill. OK, that's cool. But it's nothing of consequence.
Cruz is a civil service, elective lightweight. He should have followed Al Franken's lead and kept his fucking mouth closed for the first term, and do a lot of work. Ted Cruz could have done the work. He has a decent brain. But he chose to run for POTUS after 3 years of being in public office, and never having any Executive experience.
Anyone styling himself a constitutional conservative must support open borders. Those who do not are merely statists as the fed.gov has no power to regulate borders.
So they don't come here when they come here?If that were the case then students from overseas coming to study in the US would be exempt from immigration laws. They aren't.Huh? That doesnt make any sense. Coming here from another country makes you an immigrant. That's kind of the definition of the word.
No... An immigrant is someone who comes here from another country with the intention of staying permanently. Coming here from another country makes you a migrant.
Try again.
Again... EVERYONE is subject to US laws, including you and I. Just because it is a law that doesn't necessarily apply to you doesn't mean you are exempt from it. Students coming from overseas to study are not immigrants. They are non-immigrants.
This is the aprt I love. When posters' ignorance is revealed because they start posting contradictory and absurd things.
Post what text? The definition? Here.Wrong.Wrong. Even people who come as students or temp workers are subject to immigration laws.Nope. They are NOT immigrating. They are "migrating" perhaps... but to "immigrate" is to come in order to live permanently.
No, they are subject to laws established for guest workers, students and temporary visas. These are NOT immigrants. Go look up the definition of immigration and you'll see that it's meaning is not how you are applying it.
Check 8US Code Para 1101 under defintiions. Anyone coming here from a foreign country who is not a citizen is considered an alien and thus an immigrant and subject to immigration laws.
gonna hold you to the same standard... post the text or you're blowing smoke.
(15) The term “immigrant” means every alien except an alien who is within one of the following classes of nonimmigrant aliens—
(A)
(i)
an ambassador, public minister, or career diplomatic or consular officer who has been accredited by a foreign government, recognized de jure by the United States and who is accepted by the President or by the Secretary of State, and the members of the alien’s immediate family;
(ii)
upon a basis of reciprocity, other officials and employees who have been accredited by a foreign government recognized de jure by the United States, who are accepted by the Secretary of State, and the members of their immediate families; and
(iii)
upon a basis of reciprocity, attendants, servants, personal employees, and members of their immediate families, of the officials and employees who have a nonimmigrant status under (i) and (ii) above;
Now tell me which part of the Constitution authorizes this law.
Synth things the "Bill of Rights" is something you get in the mail every month you'ev got to pay.This is an academic question, not tethered to reality. Like the Kobayashi Maru. There is always some way to work a case up the judicial ladder.If the lower court can't consider a matter
Keep thinking that, there's only a few instances where the supremes have original jurisdiction. Try reading the Constitution occasionally.
I'm ignorant?There is no such thing as "Clause 2 Section 2" in citing the Constitution. Cites are by Article, Section, and Clause.Clause 2, Section 2.Please cite which clause fo the Constitution does this, you ignorant prick.Maybe you should stick to Halakha. Here in the U.S. our Constitution gives the SCOTUS the authority to rule whether any law that comes before them is Constitutional or not.You're such an ignorant turd. That's why debate is impossible.I thought he (and you) was the one who always wants to uphold the Constitution?
Doesn't the Constitution say that SCOTUS Justices are the final arbiters of whether a law is un-Constitutional?
And that's an Article, not an Amendment, correct?
There is nothing in the Constitution awarding the Supreme Court that power. They took it on themselves with Marbury v Madison.
That's it. Period.
You are truly an ignorant prick.
What section of the Constitution gives the POTUS the power to choose which laws he wants to enforce? There is none, you ignorant prick.It's still the use of legal discretion. Prosecutors have it in determining whether to prosecute a crime, and the POTUS has it in determining whether to enforce.Obama is a prosecutor? Wow, who knew?If Obama will not enforce a law then he effectively legalizes whatever the law criminalized. That is making law.
You remain an idiot who thinks he's smart. The saddest type.
Please show me where conservatives have railed against prosecutorial discretion, because that's all this is.
You stupid ignorant prick,an EO is not the document a prosecutor issues.
Federal bureaucrat - the type you abhore. Except when it's a conservative. He was appointed, not elected.Wow, imagine the nerve of a white man running for president after only 3 years of being in public office!Oh, I thought it was going to be a re-naming of a post office in Reagan's honor. But this is close.What bill was that?Also as far as Cruz introducing a bill, the last one he introduce passed both houses unanimously and your dear leader signed it.
What's wrong smarty pants, is your google broke?
Senate votes to bar Iran's UN pick from entering US | Fox News
A showboat bill. OK, that's cool. But it's nothing of consequence.
Cruz is a civil service, elective lightweight. He should have followed Al Franken's lead and kept his fucking mouth closed for the first term, and do a lot of work. Ted Cruz could have done the work. He has a decent brain. But he chose to run for POTUS after 3 years of being in public office, and never having any Executive experience.
Actually Cruz was in public office since 2003 as Solicitor General.
You can't hold your own on this forum, you ignorant prick. You get schooled every day by people with nothing better to do than sit here and post. Cruz would destroy you in the first 5 seconds.I would love to debate Rafael Cruz. I'd more than hold my own. Because I've heard his arguments and they are wanting.
I don't know if he qualifies as traitor - he's never been for America first.Anyone who styles himself a Constitutional Conservative must agree with this. The Constitution nowhere gives power over immigration to the federal government.Who are all these 'Constiutional Conservatives?' Can we get some names? And don't give me Ted Cruz either. He's just a Bush Family/Goldman Sachs-owned douche.
Article 4 most certainly does, traitor.
You're moving the goalpost, dopey. It's about whether the Fed Gov has the Constitutional right to control the border. That was your argument. Not immigration.Which part of the Constitution grants Congress the power to set immigration rules
Which power or country was the Immigration and Naturalization Act negotiated with? Why did the House vote on it when only the Senate ratified treaties?Post what text? The definition? Here.Wrong.Wrong. Even people who come as students or temp workers are subject to immigration laws.
No, they are subject to laws established for guest workers, students and temporary visas. These are NOT immigrants. Go look up the definition of immigration and you'll see that it's meaning is not how you are applying it.
Check 8US Code Para 1101 under defintiions. Anyone coming here from a foreign country who is not a citizen is considered an alien and thus an immigrant and subject to immigration laws.
gonna hold you to the same standard... post the text or you're blowing smoke.
(15) The term “immigrant” means every alien except an alien who is within one of the following classes of nonimmigrant aliens—
(A)
(i)
an ambassador, public minister, or career diplomatic or consular officer who has been accredited by a foreign government, recognized de jure by the United States and who is accepted by the President or by the Secretary of State, and the members of the alien’s immediate family;
(ii)
upon a basis of reciprocity, other officials and employees who have been accredited by a foreign government recognized de jure by the United States, who are accepted by the Secretary of State, and the members of their immediate families; and
(iii)
upon a basis of reciprocity, attendants, servants, personal employees, and members of their immediate families, of the officials and employees who have a nonimmigrant status under (i) and (ii) above;
Now tell me which part of the Constitution authorizes this law.
The part that gives the president the authority to negotiate treaties and diplomatic agreements. That would be Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2. Damn, you're getting more stupid by the day.
No, actually I KNOW that clause in the Constitution refers to slavery. And I cited sources that agree with me while you have yet to cite one.Synth things the "Bill of Rights" is something you get in the mail every month you'ev got to pay.This is an academic question, not tethered to reality. Like the Kobayashi Maru. There is always some way to work a case up the judicial ladder.If the lower court can't consider a matter
Keep thinking that, there's only a few instances where the supremes have original jurisdiction. Try reading the Constitution occasionally.
That's ok, you think "migration or importation of persons", only applies to black people.
Damn, son. I click on the link and it brings me to the article headed:I'm ignorant?There is no such thing as "Clause 2 Section 2" in citing the Constitution. Cites are by Article, Section, and Clause.Clause 2, Section 2.Please cite which clause fo the Constitution does this, you ignorant prick.Maybe you should stick to Halakha. Here in the U.S. our Constitution gives the SCOTUS the authority to rule whether any law that comes before them is Constitutional or not.You're such an ignorant turd. That's why debate is impossible.
There is nothing in the Constitution awarding the Supreme Court that power. They took it on themselves with Marbury v Madison.
That's it. Period.
You are truly an ignorant prick.
Section 2: CLICK
Section 2, Clause 2: CLICK
Stick to Halakha.
The stupid has really got a hold of you today.Article Three of the United States Constitution
Damn are you one stupid son of a bitch. I'd say you're merely trolling and know better but from your posts I know your knowledge of American gov't comes from reading Cracker Jack boxes.What section of the Constitution gives the POTUS the power to choose which laws he wants to enforce? There is none, you ignorant prick.It's still the use of legal discretion. Prosecutors have it in determining whether to prosecute a crime, and the POTUS has it in determining whether to enforce.Obama is a prosecutor? Wow, who knew?If Obama will not enforce a law then he effectively legalizes whatever the law criminalized. That is making law.
You remain an idiot who thinks he's smart. The saddest type.
Please show me where conservatives have railed against prosecutorial discretion, because that's all this is.
You stupid ignorant prick,an EO is not the document a prosecutor issues.
You keep calling me ignorant, and then I reply with facts that actually prove your ignorance. It's very amusing.
Here - I'll do it again:
Where did it give Reagan or Bush or Clinton or Bush the power? How about all the POTUS before Reagan?
You should quit. I'm kicking your ass again and again.
Dayum you just keep racking up the points. Are you trying for dumbest poster on USMB? Some kind of contest with Nutwinger?Federal bureaucrat - the type you abhore. Except when it's a conservative. He was appointed, not elected.Wow, imagine the nerve of a white man running for president after only 3 years of being in public office!Oh, I thought it was going to be a re-naming of a post office in Reagan's honor. But this is close.What bill was that?Also as far as Cruz introducing a bill, the last one he introduce passed both houses unanimously and your dear leader signed it.
What's wrong smarty pants, is your google broke?
Senate votes to bar Iran's UN pick from entering US | Fox News
A showboat bill. OK, that's cool. But it's nothing of consequence.
Cruz is a civil service, elective lightweight. He should have followed Al Franken's lead and kept his fucking mouth closed for the first term, and do a lot of work. Ted Cruz could have done the work. He has a decent brain. But he chose to run for POTUS after 3 years of being in public office, and never having any Executive experience.
Actually Cruz was in public office since 2003 as Solicitor General.
Cruz is unqualified.
