Politics TRUMP SAYS HE PLANS TO SIGN EXECUTIVE ORDER TO TERMINATE BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Users who are viewing this thread

A child born here is not a 'visitor', as they've not come from anywhere else. The jurisdiction phrase pretty obviously refers to the child, not the parents.
The argument though is that the 14th already contains the phrase "born or naturalized in the United States", separate from the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". If being born on US soil automatically means they're also subject to US jurisdiction, why would both phrases be included?

The existence of the second phrase does seem to suggest different criteria from the first.
 
If we are war with let's say...Russia. Russian forces were on our soil and Russian women soldiers got pregnant and had babies while technically on US soil should the babies be US citizens?

I don't think the founding fathers would think so. Just like they probably wouldn't want people having machine guns.
Well, the founding fathers didn't write the amendment, but I understand your point.
 
If we are war with let's say...Russia. Russian forces were on our soil and Russian women soldiers got pregnant and had babies while technically on US soil should the babies be US citizens?

I don't think the founding fathers would think so. Just like they probably wouldn't want people having machine guns.

Why talk about that hypothetical situation when we have an ACTUAL one with Russia? I'll even link Fox News:

Russians paying big money to have their babies born in US

But Trump doesn't want brown people er, people from "shithole" countries coming in.
 
If we are war with let's say...Russia. Russian forces were on our soil and Russian women soldiers got pregnant and had babies while technically on US soil should the babies be US citizens?

I don't think the founding fathers would think so. Just like they probably wouldn't want people having machine guns.

Does Russia use pregnant women as soldiers? At war, soldiers would be here to fight not to fuck.
 
Well, the founding fathers didn't write the amendment, but I understand your point.
I know, was just using the liberal 2nd amendment argument in reverse.

The 14th was when? Couple of hundred years ago? I'd literally have to google it but my point is that people of the time didn't imagine Chinese or Russian women flying here pregant to have the baby.
 
Why is no one complaining about the million or so undocumented EUROPEANS in our country...?

We know why...
 
I know, was just using the liberal 2nd amendment argument in reverse.

The 14th was when? Couple of hundred years ago? I'd literally have to google it but my point is that people of the time didn't imagine Chinese or Russian women flying here pregant to have the baby.
Would've been after the Civil War, so about 150 years back. Yes, I'd agree that the current immigration debate would not have been foreseen at the time of its composition.
 
Why talk about that hypothetical situation when we have an ACTUAL one with Russia? I'll even link Fox News:

Russians paying big money to have their babies born in US

But Trump doesn't want brown people er, people from "shithole" countries coming in.
You already posted this as it's own thread. Thought it should be stopped then, think it should be stopped now.

If my wife gets pregnant (god forbid) I'll take her to Disneyland to give birth so my kid can get in for free because he/she was born there.
 
Why talk about that hypothetical situation when we have an ACTUAL one with Russia? I'll even link Fox News:

Russians paying big money to have their babies born in US

But Trump doesn't want brown people er, people from "shithole" countries coming in.
Didn't we have a thread about that? I thought the forum consensus was that it was BS, but it was hard to fault them if they're not actually violating any laws.

If the 14th is reinterpreted to not permit such activity, then that would be great.
 
Actually, I take it as, Trump is the first President to enforce the law correctly. The 14th amendment was written to codify that former slaves were residents of the US. This to put down the movement to send them back to Africa.

"Amendment XIV – 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."

You should note that the former slaves, most of them born in the US were indeed subject to the jurisdiction of the US and no other country since it had been illegal to import slave for many years prior to them gaining freedom and the passing of this amendment.
I don't remember were it is exactly, perhaps Natural Law, that, No man is without a country. Thus the 14th amendment made it so.

Visitors to the country, legally or illegally, are subject to the jurisdiction of another nation, to this one only temporarily as a guest
and not at all as an illegal, that has already broken the law.

So the 14th amendment is finally interpreted correctly by Trump.

The same as we find that in the case of our own citizens born abroad. Like John McCain, a natural Born Citizen even though his place of birth was Panama. It is logical and consistent with how we enforce the law and with Natural Law as found in the
Law of Nations.

Jesus... Y'all will say anything to follow that racist to the ends of the earth...
 
Why is no one complaining about the million or so undocumented EUROPEANS in our country...?

We know why...
Because I don't know where they are? Because they haven't changed the demographics of an entire state by themselves? California...cough, cough.

Because 1 million is less than 30 million?

Because I don't have to press 1 for English because a small number of Europeans are hiding out here?

Because as far as we know they want to stay here and not send all their money back home and move back one day?

Because Democrats don't organize the Europeans to vote for them?
 
Didn't we have a thread about that? I thought the forum consensus was that it was BS, but it was hard to fault them if they're not actually violating any laws.

If the 14th is reinterpreted to not permit such activity, then that would be great.

So why are only the brown people being treated that way Plat y?

This is bullshit to say that it's ok for the Russians because they aren't breaking the law, then treat Latinos the way our country does. Why the double standard?
 
Because I don't know where they are? Because they haven't changed the demographics of an entire state by themselves? California...cough, cough.

Because 1 million is less than 30 million?

Because I don't have to press 1 for English because a small number of Europeans are hiding out here?

Because as far as we know they want to stay here and not send all their money back home and move back one day?

Because Democrats don't organize the Europeans to vote for them?

30 million...? Lou Dobbs lately?

None of those things you spouted is true.

Bush had LOTS of Latino support. He and his brother courted them as voters.

Press the button and quit whining... You just packed a lot of racist talking points in there.

Nobody's taking your job... I mean... The Europeans might be tho...
 
Because I don't know where they are? Because they haven't changed the demographics of an entire state by themselves? California...cough, cough.

Because 1 million is less than 30 million?

Because I don't have to press 1 for English because a small number of Europeans are hiding out here?

Because as far as we know they want to stay here and not send all their money back home and move back one day?

Because Democrats don't organize the Europeans to vote for them?

You should've just said because they're white...
 
Didn't we have a thread about that? I thought the forum consensus was that it was BS, but it was hard to fault them if they're not actually violating any laws.

If the 14th is reinterpreted to not permit such activity, then that would be great.

Are the people coming here seeking asylum breaking laws?

Trump wants to shoot them at the border.
 
So why are only the brown people being treated that way Plat y?

This is bullshit to say that it's ok for the Russians because they aren't breaking the law, then treat Latinos the way our country does. Why the double standard?
I can speak for how people are treating people, because I'm not the one doing it.

I can say that my thoughts on both Russian and Mexican non-residents having children on US soil is the same--if current law confers citizenship on those children, then I cannot argue it, though I am not in favor of it.

I will say that a major difference seems to be that the Russian women (as I understand it) were having their babies in the US, obtaining US citizenship for their children, and then returning to Russia, for the purpose of the child being able to utilize that citizenship in their adulthood. This is contrasted with families who travel to the United States, have their children here, and then use their child's citizenship as an argument for why the non-citizen parent(s) should be permitted to stay rather than return to their home country.

Allow me to reiterate, my views on these practices are consistent regardless of the nationality or ethnicity of the non-citizen.
 
George Bush garnered the largest Latino vote of ANY Republican president ever in 2004 with 40%.
 
Because I don't know where they are? Because they haven't changed the demographics of an entire state by themselves? California...cough, cough.

Because 1 million is less than 30 million?

Because I don't have to press 1 for English because a small number of Europeans are hiding out here?

Because as far as we know they want to stay here and not send all their money back home and move back one day?

Because Democrats don't organize the Europeans to vote for them?

If they were conservative\ republicans you would be glad to have them
 
Are the people coming here seeking asylum breaking laws?

Trump wants to shoot them at the border.
Obviously shooting asylum seekers is BS.

I do wonder, however, if they're simply seeking safety from persecution, why are they not seeking asylum in Mexico? This suggests to me that they're not primarily seeking to leave their home country, but specifically to enter this one. That seems like an abuse of asylum law to me.

Still, all declared refugees deserve reasonable consideration.
 
Does Russia use pregnant women as soldiers?

If they do, the US will lose this war. Just imagine how many times we would have to go out and get whatever they crave at the time (Get me Borscht, no, I want a smoothie) - we would surrender once they decide they want a Hawaiian pizza.
 
If they were conservative\ republicans you would be glad to have them
I'd laugh at you for getting a taste of your own medicine but no. I wouldn't be glad to have them.

Maybe this analogy will help. It is the closest thing I can think of to explain it.

I belong to a gym. I need the gym because it is good for me. Everyone needs a gym membership for their own good.

If my gym was overcrowded and people were just walking in without paying while I paid my dues every month I'd be pissed.
 
Are the people coming here seeking asylum breaking laws?

Trump wants to shoot them at the border.

He might order that. I wouldn't be surprised. For anyone else its career suicide. Shooting unarmed migrants who are seeking asylum. Trump though, they will probably throw him a parade...oh wait
 
"Send her back! Send her back! Send her back!"
I remember reading about some "Einstein" provisional visa or some other nonsense that she used to stay here.

She may be legit but I'm not sure.

Not worth looking into because she ain't going anywhere just like Obama's aunt.
 
Obviously shooting asylum seekers is BS.

I do wonder, however, if they're simply seeking safety from persecution, why are they not seeking asylum in Mexico? This suggests to me that they're not primarily seeking to leave their home country, but specifically to enter this one. That seems like an abuse of asylum law to me.

Still, all declared refugees deserve reasonable consideration.

Cause Mexico is a shithole...excuse my Trump French

This is the land of the free. The American dream
 
If they do, the US will lose this war. Just imagine how many times we would have to go out and get whatever they crave at the time (Get me Borscht, no, I want a smoothie) - we would surrender once they decide they want a Hawaiian pizza.

Or would we lose because who can shoot a pregnant lady.
 
Actually, I take it as, Trump is the first President to enforce the law correctly. The 14th amendment was written to codify that former slaves were residents of the US. This to put down the movement to send them back to Africa.

"Amendment XIV – 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."

You should note that the former slaves, most of them born in the US were indeed subject to the jurisdiction of the US and no other country since it had been illegal to import slave for many years prior to them gaining freedom and the passing of this amendment.
I don't remember were it is exactly, perhaps Natural Law, that, No man is without a country. Thus the 14th amendment made it so.

Visitors to the country, legally or illegally, are subject to the jurisdiction of another nation, to this one only temporarily as a guest
and not at all as an illegal, that has already broken the law.

So the 14th amendment is finally interpreted correctly by Trump.

The same as we find that in the case of our own citizens born abroad. Like John McCain, a natural Born Citizen even though his place of birth was Panama. It is logical and consistent with how we enforce the law and with Natural Law as found in the
Law of Nations.
Just because that's how you want to interpret it doesn't make it correct and many have spoken out that Trump is incorrect and also has no authority to do so with an executive order. I knew you were old but I had no idea you were around when the constitution was written and involved in the discussion with our fore fathers.
 
Back
Top