Trump thinks he can change the Constitution via EO

[Faun]

Sorry bout that,

1. To the moron he says Trumps children are not citizens he married Ivanka, she was his wife idiot, he is an American moron!
2. Those kids are American idiot!

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

”he [trump] is an American moron!”

Hey, look at that. We finally agree on something.

 

[mudwhistle]

No it isn't Moon Bat because the Heller and McDonald cases put the confusion about the meaning of well regulated and the silliness about the militia to rest.

The courts have also ruled on the interpretation of the Citizenship Clause:

"The fourteenth amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens, with the exceptions or qualifications (as old as the rule itself) of children of foreign sovereigns or their ministers, or born on foreign public ships, or of enemies within and during a hostile occupation of part of our territory, and with the single additional exception of children of members of the Indian tribes owing direct allegiance to their several tribes. ... To hold that the fourteenth amendment of the constitution excludes from citizenship the children born in the United States of citizens or subjects of other countries, would be to deny citizenship to thousands of persons of English, Scotch, Irish, German, or other European parentage, who have always been considered and treated as citizens of the United States. -- United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898)
​

See also, Plyler v. Doe (1982):

"Every 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.” ... 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."
​

Both quotes taken from this article on the 14th amendment written by a Trump appointee to the 5th circuit court of appeals.

​

Nope. The 14th Amendment has been misinterpreted to include children of illegals. It's original intent was to grant citizenship to freed slaves in a counter move to head of Democrats attempts to maintain slavery in the South.

This isn't true either. The application of the amendment to immigrants was discussed at the time it was written, see for example quoted passages in this post, also taken from the above article.

Sorry, that is a misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment.
Nevermind the obvious difference in a legal sense of immigrants and illegal aliens.
Nothing in the 14th Amendment grants rights to criminal immigrants....only legal immigrants. You see you can't tell the difference because you feel you benefit from criminal behavior.

The 14th Amendment is clear. The only exception it makes is for families of diplomats. Other than that, it does not say some of the people are American citizens but all of them. It says all persons born in the United States. It does not say some or everyone but.

Are you a constitutional scholar?
If not, then it is not clear.

If you read the words:

Section 1. 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
​

What it means is if you fall under the jurisdiction of another country, which clearly illegal aliens do, you do not qualify. Slaves only fell under the jurisdiction of the US. No other country. You cannot be a citizen of another country and just give birth and your child be awarded US citizenship.
However, if you renounce your citizenship and apply for US citizenship and are accepted, then your child will be born a US citizen, not a naturalized citizen.

 

[kyzr]

You don't need a constitutional amendment. There's nothing to repeal because birthright citizenship for children of illegal immmigrants does not exist in the constitution.

ENGLISH - can you read it?

Constitution states:

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.

It absolutely exists - DUH.

Read the whole thing numbnuts.

The question arises from the fact that illegals are NOT subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

Dumbass, Illegals, like just about everyone in the United States are ABSOLUTELY a subject to juristiction of the United States, the only ones who aren't are foreign diplomats.

An illegal can be prosecuted by the authorties of the United States - why? Because THEY'RE SUBJECT TO JURISTICTION.

A diplomat cannot be prosecuted by the authorities of the United States - why? because they aren't under our juristiciton (unless their country waives their immunity).

Invaders are NOT subject to jurisdiction mush-head.

Oh? An illegal alien is not subject to our laws?

Lets try to read one more time, paraphrasing...the intent was to give US citizenship to the freed slaves, over the objection of some States. The intended interpretation was to include foreign born slaves, but to exclude foreign born citizens of other countries:
"This will not include persons born in the US who are foreigners, or aliens, or families of ambassadors."

Most other countries in the world do not give citizenship to births other than by citizens. It has created a cottage industry for Chinese and Russians and others that may not have US interests at heart, 1 in 12 births are by illegals/foreigners.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Yeah porn is covered in the first. Back then you had to go to a bar to see a wenches tits today pornhub can do that. Same concept though. Those that show and those that watch.

I’m sure if they had AR-15’s that son of a bitch would have been mentioned specifically as a right to own. They had the top of the line weapons of war for the period and made no distinction between those or any other arms.

Without intent you can make it say anything you can dream up. As written and as intended is how it needs to be.

Who fucked up the 14th? The writers or the assholes that came later thinking it meant illegals? Maybe we should have stuck to what it says.

With intent you can make it say anything you can dream up, because intent is just an opinion of what someone thought 200 plus years ago.

I know a lot of people that 100% disagree that the founders intended for something like porn to be covered by the 1st. How do you prove your opinion of their intent is better than someone else opinion of their intent.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Sorry bout that,

1. But the amendment states if your are a alien you are not protected in being an automatic citizen, even if your baby is born in USA, no citizenship.
2. They are illegal aliens for God's sake!
3. And the border crashers should get a spear rammed in their chests!

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Nope, nothing in here about being an alien...seems your talking points email lied to you


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. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

[NightFox]

How do you prove your opinion of their intent is better than someone else opinion of their intent.

You prove it by asking the 9 black robed dictators on the Supreme Court what their opinion of the intent is.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

How do you prove your opinion of their intent is better than someone else opinion of their intent.

You prove it by asking the 9 black robed dictators on the Supreme Court what their opinion of the intent is.

Only if those 9 folks think that the proper way to interpret the constitution is via determining intent.

 

[caddo kid]

Legislative attempts to overturn Wong Kim Ark
In response to public reaction against immigration[116] and fears that U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants could serve as links to permit legal residency and eventual citizenship for family members who would otherwise be ineligible to remain in the country, bills have been introduced from time to time in Congress which have challenged the conventional interpretation of the Citizenship Clause and have sought (thus far unsuccessfully) to actively and explicitly deny citizenship at birth to U.S.-born children of foreign visitors or illegal aliens.[196] As one example among many, the "Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009"—introduced in the House of Representatives of the 111th Congress as H.R. 1868, by Representative Nathan Deal of Georgia—was an attempt to exclude U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants from being considered subject to the jurisdiction of the United States for purposes of the Citizenship Clause.[197] A similar proposal—named the "Birthright Citizenship Act of 2011"—was introduced in the House as H.R. 140 in the (112th) Congress on January 5, 2011 by Representative Steve King of Iowa,[198] and in the Senate as S. 723 on April 5, 2011 by Senator David Vitter of Louisiana.[199] Neither bill was discussed in Congress prior to the end of the session.

Since an act of Congress challenging the accepted interpretation of the Citizenship Clause might very possibly be ruled unconstitutional by courts choosing to rely on Wong Kim Ark as a precedent,[187] proposals have also been made to amend the Constitution so as to override the Fourteenth Amendment's language and deny citizenship to U.S.-born children of illegal aliens or foreign visitors. For example, Senator Vitter of Louisiana introduced Senate Joint Resolution (S.J.Res.) 6 in the 111th Congress, but like H.R. 1868, it failed to reach the floor of either house of Congress before the 111th Congress adjourned on December 22, 2010.[200] Vitter reintroduced this same proposed amendment as S.J.Res. 2 in the 112th Congress on January 25, 2011; it was not brought up for discussion or voted upon in either house of Congress.[201]

In 2010 and 2011, state legislators in Arizona introduced bills proposing to deny regular birth certificates to children born in Arizona whose parents could not prove they were in the United States legally. Supporters of such legislation reportedly hoped their efforts would cause the issue of birthright citizenship for U.S.-born children of illegal aliens to reach the Supreme Court, possibly resulting in a new decision narrowing or overruling Wong Kim Ark.[202][203][204]

On October 30, 2018, President Donald Trump announced his intention to issue an executive order abolishing birthright citizenship for U.S.-born children of non-citizens.[205] On this same date, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said he would introduce legislation in Congress to accomplish the same thing.[206]

 

[Norman]

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

Let's hope he can get it done. Birthright citizenship is one of those absolutely crazy ideas that should go.

Time for Trump to win for us again.

 

[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

Let's hope he can get it done. Birthright citizenship is one of those absolutely crazy ideas that should go.

Time for Trump to win for us again.

While I do not agree with birthright citizenship, let's hope he cannot get it done via EO, do you really want any POTUS to be able to alter the constitution via EO?

 

[NightFox]

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

Let's hope he can get it done. Birthright citizenship is one of those absolutely crazy ideas that should go.

Time for Trump to win for us again.

Don't get your hopes up Norman, I suspect that this talk of an EO is nothing more than an election gimmick and even if it isn't a Trumpian Gimmick there's a low probability that such an EO would be upheld by SCOTUS.

 

[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

Let's hope he can get it done. Birthright citizenship is one of those absolutely crazy ideas that should go.

Time for Trump to win for us again.

Don't get your hopes up Norman, I suspect that this talk of an EO is nothing more than an election gimmick and even if it isn't a Trumpian Gimmick there's a low probability that such an EO would be upheld by SCOTUS.

We can only hope so, or maybe the next POTUS decides via EO that only members of a well regulated Militia are allowed to own guns..,

 

[caddo kid]

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

Let's hope he can get it done. Birthright citizenship is one of those absolutely crazy ideas that should go.

Time for Trump to win for us again.

While I do not agree with birthright citizenship, let's hope he cannot get it done via EO, do you really want any POTUS to be able to alter the constitution via EO?

The people that worship at The Alter of the Cult of Trump are too stupid to recognize that once a precedent is set re: EOs to alter Amendments, then the pooch is screwed.

Go ahead Trumpians; let Don Cheeto alter the 14th A with an EO & guess what you'll get from some 'liberal' POTUS down the road? The 2nd A wil become your new toilet tissue.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

The intent of the 14th Amendment was to guarantee that former slaves that were born in the U.S. were American citizens.
That was it, PERIOD !
Illegals have used it as a loophole, to sneak into the U.S. and dump a kid, but that was NEVER the intent.

 

[Norman]

The intent of the 14th Amendment was to guarantee that former slaves that were born in the U.S. were American citizens.
That was it, PERIOD !
Illegals have used it as a loophole, to sneak into the U.S. and dump a kid, but that was NEVER the intent.

Yes, of course.

Our policies are designed for illegals rather than Americans at mind.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You are a little late to the party.

Trump thinks he can change the Constitution via EO

Trump thinks he can change the Constitution via EO


But why am I not surprised that a statist like you would support ignoring the Constitution.

 

[sparky]

will it work is the Q?

~S~

 

[caddo kid]

I am getting tired of winning here. And the anti-Americans at NYT are pissed.

"We’re the only country in the world where a person comes in and has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United States for 85 years, with all of those benefits,” Mr. Trump told Axios during an interview that was released in part on Tuesday, making a false claim. “It’s ridiculous. It’s ridiculous. And it has to end.”

Trump claims he can defy Constitution and end birthright citizenship - CNNPolitics

did you know there are other threads on the very same topic here; just sayin'

 

[iceberg]

I am getting tired of winning here. And the anti-Americans at NYT are pissed.

"We’re the only country in the world where a person comes in and has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United States for 85 years, with all of those benefits,” Mr. Trump told Axios during an interview that was released in part on Tuesday, making a false claim. “It’s ridiculous. It’s ridiculous. And it has to end.”

Trump claims he can defy Constitution and end birthright citizenship - CNNPolitics

unless he does it through the proper channels (ie congress) this is pointless. EO's were never meant to be this far reaching.

 

[Rocko]

Yeah, liberal heads were exploding over this. I guess there’s no limit to stupidity