-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Trump To Ban Anchor Babies
- Thread starter Squire
- Start date
For the people in this thread who claim birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants is legal:
Does that also apply to an the children of an army that invades US soil?
Do you really believe that all China has to do to take control of the US is seize enough land for enough time for their citizens to fly in, have children, and fly home, until their [dual-citizen] children outnumber ~50% of the US voting population?
Does that also apply to an the children of an army that invades US soil?
Do you really believe that all China has to do to take control of the US is seize enough land for enough time for their citizens to fly in, have children, and fly home, until their [dual-citizen] children outnumber ~50% of the US voting population?
Lip
Army Veteran
They do. They also believe that Democrats won't take your weapons.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2014
- Messages
- 9,597
- Likes
- 9,200
Anyone who thinks legal, illegal or constitutional vs unconstitutional has any bearing on policy is sitting at the kids table and needs to look at american history....even if it was wrong it was just done, then denounced by the same people that supported it...
As far as the babies... at the very least the parents should be charge and deported...for illegal Immigration/ child endangerment..
Then there is the whole issue of vacation babies the chinese do...
Elliminating anchor babies isnt racist... its not just browns... it appies to yellows whites, blacks and whatever the sand people are.... khaki?
It targets all colors, races, religions equally.
Allowing whats going on to continue is a failed policy... the problem is noone want to address the entire immigration system.. so were stuck with These joke debates
As far as the babies... at the very least the parents should be charge and deported...for illegal Immigration/ child endangerment..
Then there is the whole issue of vacation babies the chinese do...
Elliminating anchor babies isnt racist... its not just browns... it appies to yellows whites, blacks and whatever the sand people are.... khaki?
It targets all colors, races, religions equally.
Allowing whats going on to continue is a failed policy... the problem is noone want to address the entire immigration system.. so were stuck with These joke debates
Many smarter legal scholars than I say that "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" does not apply to visitors or illegal aliens. There is definitely a case to be made here, especially if Congress were to pass a law clarifying the point.
Also, are children of diplomats citizens too?
ETA: I will say an EO is not the way to do this and Congress needs to at least pass a law.
Also, are children of diplomats citizens too?
ETA: I will say an EO is not the way to do this and Congress needs to at least pass a law.
Asaltweapon
NES Member
The problem is, and it’s well proven that case law and standard that past practices govern rule. I’ve seen it locally and I’m about to press the issue on a major land division.
I fully realize it’s not constitutional but lawyers do what they do.
FOR THE RECORD I DON’T WANT THEM OR ANYTHING LIKE THEM HERE UNLESS THEY GO THRU THE LEGAL PROCESS
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2018
- Messages
- 768
- Likes
- 571
What an excellent point !
We DO have an invading army, and their children ARE being granted citizenship.
IT IS INSANITY
Probably there would be an EO clarifying it, and courts would back it up.
Suspending Constitutional Rights in wartime is nothing new. Even the be 3rd Amendment would likely be at risk in an invasion.
Interesting that anchir babies could be considered an invasion.
Suspending Constitutional Rights in wartime is nothing new. Even the be 3rd Amendment would likely be at risk in an invasion.
Interesting that anchir babies could be considered an invasion.
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2018
- Messages
- 768
- Likes
- 571
It's the ONLY way to do this.
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2018
- Messages
- 768
- Likes
- 571
The SCOTUS, Voting ID, ending Anchor Babies - these will save this nation.
And restoring the Voting Age to 21 wouldn't hurt.
Last I read, the President is supposed to uphold the laws of the constitution. He doesn't get to make laws. Congress does. 14th amendment is pretty clear. So are courts decisions on it. That is the current law of the land.
Don't like and it want it changed?
Then there is a process laid out pretty clearly to change it. It's been done a whole bunch of times.
Amazing all the hypocrisy here. EOs were no good when they came from someone you don't agree with, but fine when you do agree. Sheesh.
Don't like and it want it changed?
Then there is a process laid out pretty clearly to change it. It's been done a whole bunch of times.
Amazing all the hypocrisy here. EOs were no good when they came from someone you don't agree with, but fine when you do agree. Sheesh.
Land occupied by an invading army would clearly make those people not under the jurisdiction of the United States.
People within the United States otherwise are subject to our jurisdiction.
Diplomats [brought up by several others] are under the jurisdiction of their own countries and not the U.S. which is why they have "diplomatic immunity".
beaker
NES Member
So he is wrong, that was just one of the many cogent descriptions I grabbed. You aren't making an argument, you are using ridicule to deny something you don't agree with, are you a fan of Saul Alinsky? Abe Lincoln didn't go to law school, where his arguments all wrong because on your logic?
KBCraig
NES Member
1968, 1898... practically the same thing, given a century or two.
You want immigrants to go through the legal process yet at the same time cheer Trump for making it impossible to come here legally.
Conservatives: We just want immigrants to come here legally.
Also Conservatives: Make the legal process impossible.
"After failing to get Congress to institute the 40 percent cut in legal immigration he sought, Trump is trying to achieve administratively what he couldn't legislatively—by wrapping each legal immigration category in red tape and handing his bureaucrats sweeping powers to deny applications for the flimsiest of reasons."
Trump Is Building a Wall of Bureaucracy
So both of those categories need to register for the draft? Nope. There is a line that could be further defined with additional case law.
True. And the immediate lawsuits and injunctions that would follow this potential EO might be helpful in that. It’s the only real benefit I’d see in this kind of tyrannical edict.
But. Be careful what you wish for, even with a conservative SCOTUS. Legal rulings often reflect not common sense, but precedent.
Part of my initial calculus in voting for Trump was that future Presidential power may be reduced. I'd be happy to see EOs and Czars go by the wayside....they have bothered me for several administrations.
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
Two wrongs should not make a citizen.
