Trump thinks he can change the Constitution via EO

[80zephyr]

What happened to that "living document" bullshit the left keeps insisting is constitutional?

Mark

Who said it’s not still a living document?

If true, then Trump can do what he wants.

Mark

Sure he can ... and when he signs an executive order that violates the Constitution like this one, the Supreme Court will squash it like a conservative on the windshield of an 18-wheeler.

So then its not a living document.

Mark

LOLOL

I just posted the text from the Constitution itself where it details the process for amending it — and you’re still ignorant??

Amending it does not make it the "living document" the left claims it to be. They claim it can be interpreted differently because todays needs are different than they were yesterday.

Mark

 

[Deno]

Trump plans to sign executive order ending birthright citizenship: Axios

More red meat for the masses. Even he is not stupid enough to think this will work.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

My money says you're the stupid one...……...

 

[Astrostar]

Trump plans to sign executive order ending birthright citizenship: Axios

More red meat for the masses. Even he is not stupid enough to think this will work.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Yes, he is stupid enough! Bigly!

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

He does not believe he can change it with an EO, nor is that his intent.

Right, he's just a dishonest little weasel.

He enjoys toying with you people, while moving toward the goal.

 

[well named]

To think that the pre-eminent legal document in the nation provides a legality to an illegal act shows you to be a moron. Why don't you show where the SC actually ruled on this?

They have not yet, but the wording leave little wiggle room.

They have, see Plyler v. Doe (1982):

Although we have not previously focused on the intended meaning of this phrase, we have had occasion to examine the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment, which provides that "[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States. . . ." (Emphasis added.) Justice Gray, writing for the Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), detailed at some length the history of the Citizenship Clause, and the predominantly geographic sense in which the term "jurisdiction" was used. He further noted that it was impossible to construe the words "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," in the opening sentence [of the Fourteenth Amendment], as less comprehensive than the words "within its jurisdiction," in the concluding sentence of the same section; or to hold that persons "within the jurisdiction" of one of the States of the Union are not "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States." Id. at 687.

Justice Gray concluded that [e]very citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. Id. at 693. As one early commentator noted, given the historical emphasis on geographic territoriality, bounded only, if at all, by principles of sovereignty and allegiance, no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment "jurisdiction" can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful. See C. Bouve, Exclusion and Expulsion of Aliens in the United States 425-427 (1912).
​

On intent, see the detailed history of the 14th amendment discussed here

 

[Astrostar]

Trump plans to sign executive order ending birthright citizenship: Axios

More red meat for the masses. Even he is not stupid enough to think this will work.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I for one hope he can.

He can't; end of story.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

They claim it can be interpreted differently because todays needs are different than they were yesterday.

That certainly isn't the providence of liberals. In fact, it's why we have a Supreme Court. It's why unlimited dark money in politics is constitutionally protected. And it's why, when the horrible citizens united ruling is overturned or subrogated, it won't be constitutionally protected.

 

[kyzr]

Just saw the arguments for not granting citizenship to illegals under the 14th Amendment. The argument convinced me.
The intent of the amendments wording, as explained by the writers "excludes the children of diplomats and anyone who is a citizen of another country"

Birthright Citizenship for Children of Foreign Diplomats?

“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."

Its the phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" that has been misinterpreted by the government, and should be the basis for rejecting the Chinese and Russian "cottage industry" of making US anchor babies. I hope Trump succeeds in ending the "anchor baby" fiasco, because currently 1 out of every 12 births are to non-citizens and create an anchor baby. Its not changing the 14th Amendment, its correctly interpreting it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

He does not believe he can change it with an EO, nor is that his intent.

Right, he's just a dishonest little weasel.

He enjoys toying with you people, while moving toward the goal.

And he gets away with it because of you and his 30 million surrogate mommies who would throw yourselves at his feet to shield him.

 

[busybee01]

The 14th amendment was never meant for illegal aliens.
We don't have to amend the constitution, we just have to interpret the law correctly.

Yes you do have to amend the Constitution. The plain English interpretation is the correct one.

 

[whitehall]

As always the democrats seem to set the bar the highest. FDR nominated a KKK member to the Court and Justice Black paid him back with a convoluted justification for the incarceration of American citizens without due process based on ethnic appearance. You could probably find law schools and law professors who would defend it even today out of insane loyalty to the high water era of democrat party philosophy. FDR's skewed executive order is defended mostly on the basis of nationalism but the same left wing hypocrisy ridicules nationalism when it comes to illegal immigration. Go figure

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

He does not believe he can change it with an EO, nor is that his intent.

Right, he's just a dishonest little weasel.

He enjoys toying with you people, while moving toward the goal.

And he gets away with it because of you and his 30 million surrogate mommies who would throw yourselves at his feet to shield him.

He gets away with it cause you people are fucking stupid. You don't even realize - after two years - that he is doing it.

 

[busybee01]

Just saw the arguments for not granting citizenship to illegals under the 14th Amendment. The argument convinced me.
The intent of the amendments wording, as explained by the writers "excludes the children of diplomats and anyone who is a citizen of another country"

Birthright Citizenship for Children of Foreign Diplomats?

“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."

Its the phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" that has been misinterpreted by the government, and should be the basis for rejecting the Chinese and Russian "cottage industry" of making US anchor babies. I hope Trump succeeds in ending the "anchor baby" fiasco, because currently 1 out of every 12 births are to non-citizens and create an anchor baby. Its not changing the 14th Amendment, its correctly interpreting it.

If you are in the country, you are subject to the jurisdiction of the county, city, state and country.

 

[kyzr]

Trump plans to sign executive order ending birthright citizenship: Axios

More red meat for the masses. Even he is not stupid enough to think this will work.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I for one hope he can.

He can't; end of story.

I'm sorry, but he will.
Its a question for the Courts, there are very good arguments for Trump's interpretation, namely, the explanation of the guys who wrote it. i.e. he's not changing it, just correcting the interpretation.

 

[busybee01]

Good way to get the ball rolling on The Constitutionality of Birth Right Citizenship. Today's Leftist interpretation is completely Unconstitutional.

This was always meant for Legal Immigrants, or people on Work Visas, Student Visas that had children in THE US while they were in a LEGAL STATUS. Those children then become automatic American Citizens.

The language is clear and even Paul Ryan admits it.

 

[busybee01]

Stop calling them invaders. Anyone calling them that should have their post pulled.

It's the truth. It's what they are. I know, that as a good LIbEral, you prefer lies and deceit over truth, but I am a sane person, not a LIbEral, so I'll stick with telling the truth, no matter how much it offends left wrong-wing filth such as yourself.

Rule #1 applies:

Every argument from Democrats and Liberals is a misrepresentation, a fabrication, or a bald-faced lie.

Rule #1 applies to you.

Every argument you make is a misrepresentation, fabrication or bald faced lie.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Trump plans to sign executive order ending birthright citizenship: Axios

More red meat for the masses. Even he is not stupid enough to think this will work.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

My money says you're the stupid one...……...

A fool and his money are soon parted

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Good way to get the ball rolling on The Constitutionality of Birth Right Citizenship. Today's Leftist interpretation is completely Unconstitutional.

This was always meant for Legal Immigrants, or people on Work Visas, Student Visas that had children in THE US while they were in a LEGAL STATUS. Those children then become automatic American Citizens.

The language is clear and even Paul Ryan admits it.

"Even" Paul Ryan.

Well then, a lost cause.

 

[80zephyr]

They claim it can be interpreted differently because todays needs are different than they were yesterday.

That certainly isn't the providence of liberals. In fact, it's why we have a Supreme Court. It's why unlimited dark money in politics is constitutionally protected. And it's why, when the horrible citizens united ruling is overturned or subrogated, it won't be constitutionally protected.

When I google "the Constitution as a living document" it is the left who is making that claim.

Mark

 

[Deno]

Trump plans to sign executive order ending birthright citizenship: Axios

More red meat for the masses. Even he is not stupid enough to think this will work.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

My money says you're the stupid one...……...

A fool and his money are soon parted

Would you care to make a wager?