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.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Friends Of Liberty:
Points to Ponder
Did the Jews have a right to live in nazi Germany
yes, of course.
But was the nazi hierarchy convinced? Fuck No.
Any argument presented that the Jews were humans beings who had a right to life was summarily dismissed because the regimen was convinced that it had the right to criminalize Jewishness and execute its practitioners.
.
If you walked into a court room and presented this the judge would just whip his dick out and shove it down your throat to shut you up.
Friends Of Liberty:
Points to Ponder
Did the Jews have a right to live in nazi Germany
yes, of course.
But was the nazi hierarchy convinced? Fuck No.
Any argument presented that the Jews were humans beings who had a right to life was summarily dismissed because the regimen was convinced that it had the right to criminalize Jewishness and execute its practitioners.
.
If you walked into a court room and presented this the judge would just whip his dick out and shove it down your throat to shut you up.
Which would lead C to walk out of the courtroom then come back in a few minutes to give his presentation again, walk out and come back, walk out and come back...
If you walked into a court room and presented this the judge would just whip his dick out and shove it down your throat to shut you up.
Which would lead C to walk out of the courtroom then come back in a few minutes to give his presentation again, walk out and come back, walk out and come back...
Yes, indeed. When defending rights
If you walked into a court room and presented this the judge would just whip his dick out and shove it down your throat to shut you up.
Which would lead C to walk out of the courtroom then come back in a few minutes to give his presentation again, walk out and come back, walk out and come back...
Yes, indeed. When defending rights
Friends Of Liberty:
Points to Ponder
Did the Jews have a right to live in nazi Germany
yes, of course.
But was the nazi hierarchy convinced? Fuck No.
Any argument presented that the Jews were humans beings who had a right to life was summarily dismissed because the regimen was convinced that it had the right to criminalize Jewishness and execute its practitioners.
.
If you walked into a court room and presented this the judge would just whip his dick out and shove it down your throat to shut you up.
Which would lead C to walk out of the courtroom then come back in a few minutes to give his presentation again, walk out and come back, walk out and come back...
Undocumented Immigration is not a Federal a Crime
4. _Resolved_, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the -- day of July, 1798, intituled "An Act concerning aliens," which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force.
Thomas Jefferson
Founding Father
3rd US President
Undocumented Immigration is not a Federal a Crime
4. _Resolved_, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the -- day of July, 1798, intituled "An Act concerning aliens," which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force.
Thomas Jefferson
Founding Father
3rd US President
1) Passed on 'which' day?
2) 1798???
3) have there been no amendments or laws passed since July ??, 1798????
Avalon Project - Draft of the Kentucky Resolutions - October 17981. _Resolved_, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.
2. _Resolved_, That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, and no other crimes whatsoever; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," therefore the act of Congress, passed on the 14th day of July, 1798, and intituled "An Act in addition to the act intituled An Act for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States," as also the act passed by them on the -- day of June, 1798, intituled "An Act to punish frauds committed on the bank of the United States," (and all their other acts which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution,) are altogether void, and of no force; and that the power to create, define, and punish such other crimes is reserved, and, of right, appertains solely and exclusively to the respective States, each within its own territory.
3. _Resolved_, That it is true as a general principle, and is also expressly declared by one of the amendments to the Constitution, that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people;" and that no power over the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, all lawful powers respecting the same did of right remain, and were reserved to the States or the people: that thus was manifested their determination to retain to themselves the right of judging how far the licentiousness of speech and of the press may be abridged without lessening their useful freedom, and how far those abuses which cannot be separated from their use should be tolerated, rather than the use be destroyed. And thus also they guarded against all abridgment by the United States of the freedom of religious opinions and exercises, and retained to themselves the right of protecting the same, as this State, by a law passed on the general demand of its citizens, had already protected them from all human restraint or interference. And that in addition to this general principle and express declaration, another and more special provision has been made by one of the amendments to the Constitution, which expressly declares, that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press:" thereby guarding in the same sentence, and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press: insomuch, that whatever violated either, throws down the sanctuary which covers the others, and that libels, falsehood, and defamation, equally with heresy and false religion, are withheld from the cognizance of federal tribunals. That, therefore, the act of Congress of the United States, passed on the 14th day of July, 1798, intituled "An Act in addition to the act intituled An Act for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States," which does abridge the freedom of the press, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force.
4. _Resolved_, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the -- day of July, 1798, intituled "An Act concerning aliens," which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force.
* * * *
Undocumented Immigration is not a Federal a Crime
4. _Resolved_, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the -- day of July, 1798, intituled "An Act concerning aliens," which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force.
Thomas Jefferson
Founding Father
3rd US President
1) Passed on 'which' day?
2) 1798???
3) have there been no amendments or laws passed since July ??, 1798????
Undocumented Immigration is not a Federal a Crime
4. _Resolved_, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the -- day of July, 1798, intituled "An Act concerning aliens," which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force.
Thomas Jefferson
Founding Father
3rd US President
1) Passed on 'which' day?
2) 1798???
3) have there been no amendments or laws passed since July ??, 1798????
After James Madison and Thomas Jefferson opposed the immigration laws congress allowed the same to expire in 1800.
Congress did not adopt another law until 1888. For 88 years there was no federal immigration law.
The federal government has the authority to NATURALIZE citizens but has no authority to detain and deport those individuals who only have the citizenship of the state in which they reside.
SCOTUS has recognized the fact that the states retained the authority to confer their citizenship on whomever they choose.
.
.
Undocumented Immigration is not a Federal a Crime
4. _Resolved_, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the -- day of July, 1798, intituled "An Act concerning aliens," which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force.
Thomas Jefferson
Founding Father
3rd US President
1) Passed on 'which' day?
2) 1798???
3) have there been no amendments or laws passed since July ??, 1798????
After James Madison and Thomas Jefferson opposed the immigration laws congress allowed the same to expire in 1800.
Congress did not adopt another law until 1888. For 88 years there was no federal immigration law.
The federal government has the authority to NATURALIZE citizens but has no authority to detain and deport those individuals who only have the citizenship of the state in which they reside.
SCOTUS has recognized the fact that the states retained the authority to confer their citizenship on whomever they choose.
.
.
1) Passed on 'which' day?
2) 1798???
3) have there been no amendments or laws passed since July ??, 1798????
After James Madison and Thomas Jefferson opposed the immigration laws congress allowed the same to expire in 1800.
Congress did not adopt another law until 1888. For 88 years there was no federal immigration law.
The federal government has the authority to NATURALIZE citizens but has no authority to detain and deport those individuals who only have the citizenship of the state in which they reside.
SCOTUS has recognized the fact that the states retained the authority to confer their citizenship on whomever they choose.
.
.
Liability said:Historically muddled, as always. The SCOTUS recognizED the fact that states retained authority as to the conferring of citizenship UNTIL the Federal Government assumed the power over such matters. And it was RECOGNIZED as an incident of sovereignty.
The Federal Government has no LEGAL AUTHORITY to "assume the power". The Constitution must be amended first .
Bureaucrats now claim that the federal government can just "assume" any powers : Obama seriously believe that the federal government can force us to buy health insurance; presidents assume that they can invade any country whenever for whatever reason. The "conservatives" do it, the "liberals" do it. So who supports and defends the constitution against domestic enemies?
Why go through the hassle of writing a Constitution if the bureaucrats can claim at any time that their acts are recognized as "incident of sovereignty"?!?!?!?
.
Contumacious said:Liability said:Historically muddled, as always. The SCOTUS recognizED the fact that states retained authority as to the conferring of citizenship UNTIL the Federal Government assumed the power over such matters. And it was RECOGNIZED as an incident of sovereignty.
The Federal Government has no LEGAL AUTHORITY to "assume the power". The Constitution must be amended first .
Bureaucrats now claim that the federal government can just "assume" any powers : Obama seriously believe that the federal government can force us to buy health insurance; presidents assume that they can invade any country whenever for whatever reason. The "conservatives" do it, the "liberals" do it. So who supports and defends the constitution against domestic enemies?
Why go through the hassle of writing a Constitution if the bureaucrats can claim at any time that their acts are recognized as "incident of sovereignty"?!?!?!?
.
The Constitution does not need to be amended to put in explicit terminology for EVERY conceivable contingency, stupid.
The Constitution does not need to be amended to put in explicit terminology for EVERY conceivable contingency, stupid.
1. _Resolved_, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.
.
Is it really “Illegal?”
Is coming into the United States really illegal? Should it be illegal? Are the anti – immigrant / National Socialists right or wrong?
I’m going to do this in several parts because it is difficult and you should take your time, reading each post, thinking it over and responding only after meditating on the facts versus the myths widely believed.
I’m starting this thread and there is nothing new, but it if it all appears at the beginning of a thread, you can see the circus atmosphere that the National Socialists will start because they cannot prevail over the facts. All you should do is concern yourself with is the facts. YOUR Liberty depends upon it.
The first FACT is that there are no laws making it a crime to be in the United States without papers. The National Socialists will try and dispute it, but we will present irrefutable facts. The reason this is important is that if they are allowed to create bad precedents in interpreting the law, it will have a net negative impact on YOUR Rights and Liberties. So, let’s get right to it.
The only statute the National Socialists can come up with is Title 8 USC 1325 to attempt to “prove” a supposed crime of illegal immigration (which absolutely does not exist.) My commentary on the statute is in red. It is fully quoted:
8 U.S.C. § 1325 : US Code - Section 1325: Improper entry by alien
Notice that this is a civil section of the law. It is not a criminal title. It is talking about an improper action, not an illegal one.
(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection;
misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States
at any time or place other than as designated by immigration
officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration
officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United
States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the
willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first
commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or
imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent
commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or
imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
Notice that under this section, several infractions / crimes are being discussed. Title 8 (Eight) does not impose a criminal penalty, but defers the criminal consequences to Title 18
(b) Improper time or place; civil penalties
Any alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to
enter) the United States at a time or place other than as
designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil
penalty of -
(1) at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry (or
attempted entry); or
Improper Entry is not a crime in Title 18; therefore, an immigrant cannot be charged with a crime for improper entry since none exists in Title 18 (Eighteen); however, there is the civil penalty of up to $250
(2) twice the amount specified in paragraph (1) in the case of
an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty under
this subsection.
Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not
in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be
imposed.
The civil penalties are different from the criminal charges and are treated separately. For instance, the criminal courts may fine a foreigner a total of one amount for lying to authorities and evasion (they may even suspend the criminal penalties) but that has no bearing on the civil penalties for improper entry (which consist of a fine of up to $250 and deportation)
(c) Marriage fraud
Any individual who knowingly enters into a marriage for the
purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be
imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or fined not more than
$250,000, or both.
(d) Immigration-related entrepreneurship fraud
Any individual who knowingly establishes a commercial enterprise
for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws
shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, fined in accordance
with title 18, or both. (End of Statute)
YOUR Liberties depend upon a correct interpretation of the facts.
. There are many like you. You, and those like you, have no idea what harm these illegals have and ARE doing. .
. There are many like you. You, and those like you, have no idea what harm these illegals have and ARE doing. .
Let's wait until there are 5 Hispanic Justices in SCOTUS.
We shall see if they agree with you that all the brown skin folks are creating an "emergency" like the Chinese allegedly did in 1888.
Get ready for more mestizos in your midst..
. There are many like you. You, and those like you, have no idea what harm these illegals have and ARE doing. .
Let's wait until there are 5 Hispanic Justices in SCOTUS.
We shall see if they agree with you that all the brown skin folks are creating an "emergency" like the Chinese allegedly did in 1888.
Get ready for more mestizos in your midst..
Why do you need to consider people by the color of their skin, racist?
Let's wait until there are 5 Hispanic Justices in SCOTUS.
We shall see if they agree with you that all the brown skin folks are creating an "emergency" like the Chinese allegedly did in 1888.
Get ready for more mestizos in your midst..
Why do you need to consider people by the color of their skin, racist?
Hummmmm
You are a little slow on the uptake
I have already posted the first federal immigration case in 1888 - where the SCOTUS admitted that it ***USURPED**** the authority to control immigration because the chinese race was irritating "our people".
.
