More winning. Trump clamping down on Birther Tourism

[Harpy Eagle]

He was born on a military base. Even then it would be up to the laws of Panama. I have no idea what they are but it's irrelevant.
.

The laws of Panama have nothing to do with if he was an American citizen or not

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

1. written over 200 years ago--this is not 1850 or 1950 anymore
2. written by men who thought slavery was ok and women shouldn't vote
3. written by humans who are not perfect
4. can be interpreted many ways

It's a part of the 14th Amendment. 1868.

According to the Constitution's 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868 to ensure citizenship for the newly emancipated African Americans, "all persons, born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude from automatic citizenship American-born persons whose allegiance to the United States was incomplete. For example, Native Americans were excluded from American citizenship because of their tribal jurisdiction. Also not subject to American jurisdiction were foreign visitors, ambassadors, consuls, and their babies born here. In the case of illegal aliens, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child. Therefore, some Constitutional scholars argue that the completeness of the allegiance to the United States is impaired and logically precludes automatic citizenship. However, this issue has never been directly decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Birthright Citizenship | Federation for American Immigration Reform

Nowhere does it include "foreign visitors". They are completely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. If an Ambassador commits a crime, they are not.

Has nothing to do if they commit a crime or not. John McCain was not born in the states. His father was serving overseas when he was born. However McCain is an American citizen because he was born to American parents. His allegiance is to the US.

He was born on a military base. Even then it would be up to the laws of Panama. I have no idea what they are but it's irrelevant.

Elian Gonzalez was sent back to Cuba because he was a Cuban citizen. We had no right to keep him here, and one of the few things Clinton did right was send him back in spite of the resistance of Americans. He was a Cuban citizen, he went back to the country he had allegiance with.

Yes, he was a Cuban citizen which has nothing to do with what is being discussed.

Sure it does, because a baby born here to Chinese parents is still a Chinese child. It doesn't matter if McCain was born on base or next to the canal. He was still a citizen no matter what.

It's just like the stupid birther movement. It didn't matter where DumBama was born because he was born to an American mother. No matter where he was born, he's a US citizen be it from Hawaii or Somalia.

 

[pknopp]

He was born on a military base. Even then it would be up to the laws of Panama. I have no idea what they are but it's irrelevant.
.

The laws of Panama have nothing to do with if he was an American citizen or not

That's what I said. He was born on an American military base. He is an American citizen.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Birther tourism is a practice of pregnant women coming to the US to drop anchor babies. Sometimes they do it to anchor themselves into the country, and other times it's more nefarious, like having a baby so it's an American, and taking it back home to be radicalized by their government or religion. Once an adult, that person can walk into this country, no questions asked, to do God knows what kind of harm to us.

As expected, the Democrats could care less. The more non-Americans in the country, the better, regardless of the potential danger to citizens. Thank God Trump is President; the first President to ever take a hard look and action on this growing problem.

You need to be subscriber to get the entire article, but it shows enough to get the gist of it.

White House Explains New Birth Tourism Crackdown

Trolling ^^^

 

[rightwinger]

Yeah, that constitution is a pesky little document that just hurts "real amuricans", and should be subject to change by the whim of a presidential executive order, right?

The fourteenth amendment was not written for anchor babies. It had to do with citizenship of freed slaves and their children.

They could have written it to apply to slaves only....they didn’t

They didn't expect us to ever grow dumb enough to have liberals. Otherwise the Constitution would be 50 pages long, to include color pictures, so that liberals in the future would be able to figure it out.

There was massive Irish Immigration when the 14th amendment was written. It was obviously open ended to include all births.

It was not an OOPs

No, it was not. Arguments were made to prevent that from happening, hence the phrase Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof.

We had massive immigration after the 14th amendment was written
All subject to birthright citizenship.

 

[pknopp]

It's a part of the 14th Amendment. 1868.

According to the Constitution's 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868 to ensure citizenship for the newly emancipated African Americans, "all persons, born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude from automatic citizenship American-born persons whose allegiance to the United States was incomplete. For example, Native Americans were excluded from American citizenship because of their tribal jurisdiction. Also not subject to American jurisdiction were foreign visitors, ambassadors, consuls, and their babies born here. In the case of illegal aliens, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child. Therefore, some Constitutional scholars argue that the completeness of the allegiance to the United States is impaired and logically precludes automatic citizenship. However, this issue has never been directly decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Birthright Citizenship | Federation for American Immigration Reform

Nowhere does it include "foreign visitors". They are completely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. If an Ambassador commits a crime, they are not.

Has nothing to do if they commit a crime or not. John McCain was not born in the states. His father was serving overseas when he was born. However McCain is an American citizen because he was born to American parents. His allegiance is to the US.

He was born on a military base. Even then it would be up to the laws of Panama. I have no idea what they are but it's irrelevant.

Elian Gonzalez was sent back to Cuba because he was a Cuban citizen. We had no right to keep him here, and one of the few things Clinton did right was send him back in spite of the resistance of Americans. He was a Cuban citizen, he went back to the country he had allegiance with.

Yes, he was a Cuban citizen which has nothing to do with what is being discussed.

Sure it does, because a baby born here to Chinese parents is still a Chinese child. It doesn't matter if McCain was born on base or next to the canal. He was still a citizen no matter what.

It's just like the stupid birther movement. It didn't matter where DumBama was born because he was born to an American mother. No matter where he was born, he's a US citizen be it from Hawaii or Somalia.

Depends on the countries laws. In the U.S. our law grants citizenship if at least one parent is. Even then it can be complicated. It's not always automatic.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

According to the Constitution's 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868 to ensure citizenship for the newly emancipated African Americans, "all persons, born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude from automatic citizenship American-born persons whose allegiance to the United States was incomplete. For example, Native Americans were excluded from American citizenship because of their tribal jurisdiction. Also not subject to American jurisdiction were foreign visitors, ambassadors, consuls, and their babies born here. In the case of illegal aliens, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child. Therefore, some Constitutional scholars argue that the completeness of the allegiance to the United States is impaired and logically precludes automatic citizenship. However, this issue has never been directly decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Birthright Citizenship | Federation for American Immigration Reform

Nowhere does it include "foreign visitors". They are completely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. If an Ambassador commits a crime, they are not.

Has nothing to do if they commit a crime or not. John McCain was not born in the states. His father was serving overseas when he was born. However McCain is an American citizen because he was born to American parents. His allegiance is to the US.

He was born on a military base. Even then it would be up to the laws of Panama. I have no idea what they are but it's irrelevant.

Elian Gonzalez was sent back to Cuba because he was a Cuban citizen. We had no right to keep him here, and one of the few things Clinton did right was send him back in spite of the resistance of Americans. He was a Cuban citizen, he went back to the country he had allegiance with.

Yes, he was a Cuban citizen which has nothing to do with what is being discussed.

Sure it does, because a baby born here to Chinese parents is still a Chinese child. It doesn't matter if McCain was born on base or next to the canal. He was still a citizen no matter what.

It's just like the stupid birther movement. It didn't matter where DumBama was born because he was born to an American mother. No matter where he was born, he's a US citizen be it from Hawaii or Somalia.

Depends on the countries laws. In the U.S. our law grants citizenship if at least one parent is. Even then it can be complicated. It's not always automatic.

It doesn't matter what other country's laws are. Our law is if it's an American parent, it's an American child. That child has an allegiance to the United States. If the parent(s) suddenly died overseas, that child comes back to us.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The fourteenth amendment was not written for anchor babies. It had to do with citizenship of freed slaves and their children.

They could have written it to apply to slaves only....they didn’t

They didn't expect us to ever grow dumb enough to have liberals. Otherwise the Constitution would be 50 pages long, to include color pictures, so that liberals in the future would be able to figure it out.

There was massive Irish Immigration when the 14th amendment was written. It was obviously open ended to include all births.

It was not an OOPs

No, it was not. Arguments were made to prevent that from happening, hence the phrase Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof.

We had massive immigration after the 14th amendment was written
All subject to birthright citizenship.

Immigration and citizenship are two different things. At one time there was no such thing as an illegal alien. That changed throughout the years because after we created this great place, we couldn't allow everybody in willy-nilly. Some laws and restrictions had to be put in place.

 

[pknopp]

Nowhere does it include "foreign visitors". They are completely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. If an Ambassador commits a crime, they are not.

Has nothing to do if they commit a crime or not. John McCain was not born in the states. His father was serving overseas when he was born. However McCain is an American citizen because he was born to American parents. His allegiance is to the US.

He was born on a military base. Even then it would be up to the laws of Panama. I have no idea what they are but it's irrelevant.

Elian Gonzalez was sent back to Cuba because he was a Cuban citizen. We had no right to keep him here, and one of the few things Clinton did right was send him back in spite of the resistance of Americans. He was a Cuban citizen, he went back to the country he had allegiance with.

Yes, he was a Cuban citizen which has nothing to do with what is being discussed.

Sure it does, because a baby born here to Chinese parents is still a Chinese child. It doesn't matter if McCain was born on base or next to the canal. He was still a citizen no matter what.

It's just like the stupid birther movement. It didn't matter where DumBama was born because he was born to an American mother. No matter where he was born, he's a US citizen be it from Hawaii or Somalia.

Depends on the countries laws. In the U.S. our law grants citizenship if at least one parent is. Even then it can be complicated. It's not always automatic.

It doesn't matter what other country's laws are. Our law is if it's an American parent, it's an American child. That child has an allegiance to the United States. If the parent(s) suddenly died overseas, that child comes back to us.

Not necessarily and it's all irrelevant.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Has nothing to do if they commit a crime or not. John McCain was not born in the states. His father was serving overseas when he was born. However McCain is an American citizen because he was born to American parents. His allegiance is to the US.

He was born on a military base. Even then it would be up to the laws of Panama. I have no idea what they are but it's irrelevant.

Elian Gonzalez was sent back to Cuba because he was a Cuban citizen. We had no right to keep him here, and one of the few things Clinton did right was send him back in spite of the resistance of Americans. He was a Cuban citizen, he went back to the country he had allegiance with.

Yes, he was a Cuban citizen which has nothing to do with what is being discussed.

Sure it does, because a baby born here to Chinese parents is still a Chinese child. It doesn't matter if McCain was born on base or next to the canal. He was still a citizen no matter what.

It's just like the stupid birther movement. It didn't matter where DumBama was born because he was born to an American mother. No matter where he was born, he's a US citizen be it from Hawaii or Somalia.

Depends on the countries laws. In the U.S. our law grants citizenship if at least one parent is. Even then it can be complicated. It's not always automatic.

It doesn't matter what other country's laws are. Our law is if it's an American parent, it's an American child. That child has an allegiance to the United States. If the parent(s) suddenly died overseas, that child comes back to us.

Not necessarily and it's all irrelevant.

Well let me tell you what is relevant, and that is there are people out there wanting to do us harm. Why should we allow liberals to make that easier for them to do.

What you don't understand is they are using our laws against us, and only a Democrat would approve.

 

[pknopp]

He was born on a military base. Even then it would be up to the laws of Panama. I have no idea what they are but it's irrelevant.

Yes, he was a Cuban citizen which has nothing to do with what is being discussed.

Sure it does, because a baby born here to Chinese parents is still a Chinese child. It doesn't matter if McCain was born on base or next to the canal. He was still a citizen no matter what.

It's just like the stupid birther movement. It didn't matter where DumBama was born because he was born to an American mother. No matter where he was born, he's a US citizen be it from Hawaii or Somalia.

Depends on the countries laws. In the U.S. our law grants citizenship if at least one parent is. Even then it can be complicated. It's not always automatic.

It doesn't matter what other country's laws are. Our law is if it's an American parent, it's an American child. That child has an allegiance to the United States. If the parent(s) suddenly died overseas, that child comes back to us.

Not necessarily and it's all irrelevant.

Well let me tell you what is relevant, and that is there are people out there wanting to do us harm. Why should we allow liberals to make that easier for them to do.

What you don't understand is they are using our laws against us, and only a Democrat would approve.

Your constant fall back position. Be scared. LOL

Every single person born here could be the next mass murderer but that does not change the Constitution.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

We had massive immigration after the 14th amendment was written
All subject to birthright citizenship.

But they were not coming over having babies and then taking themselves and their babies back home.

 

[rightwinger]

They could have written it to apply to slaves only....they didn’t

They didn't expect us to ever grow dumb enough to have liberals. Otherwise the Constitution would be 50 pages long, to include color pictures, so that liberals in the future would be able to figure it out.

There was massive Irish Immigration when the 14th amendment was written. It was obviously open ended to include all births.

It was not an OOPs

No, it was not. Arguments were made to prevent that from happening, hence the phrase Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof.

We had massive immigration after the 14th amendment was written
All subject to birthright citizenship.

Immigration and citizenship are two different things. At one time there was no such thing as an illegal alien. That changed throughout the years because after we created this great place, we couldn't allow everybody in willy-nilly. Some laws and restrictions had to be put in place.

Guess what?

Those millions of immigrants who came in after the 14th amendment?
Their children were citizens

Nobody said.....sorry, only applies to Negroes

 

[Harpy Eagle]

They didn't expect us to ever grow dumb enough to have liberals. Otherwise the Constitution would be 50 pages long, to include color pictures, so that liberals in the future would be able to figure it out.

There was massive Irish Immigration when the 14th amendment was written. It was obviously open ended to include all births.

It was not an OOPs

No, it was not. Arguments were made to prevent that from happening, hence the phrase Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof.

We had massive immigration after the 14th amendment was written
All subject to birthright citizenship.

Immigration and citizenship are two different things. At one time there was no such thing as an illegal alien. That changed throughout the years because after we created this great place, we couldn't allow everybody in willy-nilly. Some laws and restrictions had to be put in place.

Guess what?

Those millions of immigrants who came in after the 14th amendment?
Their children were citizens

Nobody said.....sorry, only applies to Negroes

But they were not coming over having babies and then taking themselves and their babies back home.

Right now people are coming here on vacation for the singular purpose ot have a child so it is a US citizen and then taking themselves and the child back to their homeland.

This was not going on at the time of the 14th amendment.

Why do you pretend the situations are the same?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sure it does, because a baby born here to Chinese parents is still a Chinese child. It doesn't matter if McCain was born on base or next to the canal. He was still a citizen no matter what.

It's just like the stupid birther movement. It didn't matter where DumBama was born because he was born to an American mother. No matter where he was born, he's a US citizen be it from Hawaii or Somalia.

Depends on the countries laws. In the U.S. our law grants citizenship if at least one parent is. Even then it can be complicated. It's not always automatic.

It doesn't matter what other country's laws are. Our law is if it's an American parent, it's an American child. That child has an allegiance to the United States. If the parent(s) suddenly died overseas, that child comes back to us.

Not necessarily and it's all irrelevant.

Well let me tell you what is relevant, and that is there are people out there wanting to do us harm. Why should we allow liberals to make that easier for them to do.

What you don't understand is they are using our laws against us, and only a Democrat would approve.

Your constant fall back position. Be scared. LOL

Every single person born here could be the next mass murderer but that does not change the Constitution.

No need for the Constitution to be changed, just interpreted properly. It's not about being scared, it's about being smart. If one of these anchor babies allowed to be born here by our government, comes back and performs another 911 or worse, the first thing people will be asking is how were we stupid enough to not stop it when we had the chance. The answer of course will be--Democrats.

 

[rightwinger]

There was massive Irish Immigration when the 14th amendment was written. It was obviously open ended to include all births.

It was not an OOPs

No, it was not. Arguments were made to prevent that from happening, hence the phrase Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof.

We had massive immigration after the 14th amendment was written
All subject to birthright citizenship.

Immigration and citizenship are two different things. At one time there was no such thing as an illegal alien. That changed throughout the years because after we created this great place, we couldn't allow everybody in willy-nilly. Some laws and restrictions had to be put in place.

Guess what?

Those millions of immigrants who came in after the 14th amendment?
Their children were citizens

Nobody said.....sorry, only applies to Negroes

But they were not coming over having babies and then taking themselves and their babies back home.

Right now people are coming here on vacation for the singular purpose ot have a child so it is a US citizen and then taking themselves and the child back to their homeland.

This was not going on at the time of the 14th amendment.

Why do you pretend the situations are the same?

Their children were citizens
Just like today

 

[rightwinger]

I still doubt if Trumps ban on pregnant women will survive a court challenge

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No, it was not. Arguments were made to prevent that from happening, hence the phrase Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof.

We had massive immigration after the 14th amendment was written
All subject to birthright citizenship.

Immigration and citizenship are two different things. At one time there was no such thing as an illegal alien. That changed throughout the years because after we created this great place, we couldn't allow everybody in willy-nilly. Some laws and restrictions had to be put in place.

Guess what?

Those millions of immigrants who came in after the 14th amendment?
Their children were citizens

Nobody said.....sorry, only applies to Negroes

But they were not coming over having babies and then taking themselves and their babies back home.

Right now people are coming here on vacation for the singular purpose ot have a child so it is a US citizen and then taking themselves and the child back to their homeland.

This was not going on at the time of the 14th amendment.

Why do you pretend the situations are the same?

Their children were citizens
Just like today

But they stayed here and lived here and grew up as Americans.

You are not normally this dishonest, why are you being so now

 

[pknopp]

Depends on the countries laws. In the U.S. our law grants citizenship if at least one parent is. Even then it can be complicated. It's not always automatic.

It doesn't matter what other country's laws are. Our law is if it's an American parent, it's an American child. That child has an allegiance to the United States. If the parent(s) suddenly died overseas, that child comes back to us.

Not necessarily and it's all irrelevant.

Well let me tell you what is relevant, and that is there are people out there wanting to do us harm. Why should we allow liberals to make that easier for them to do.

What you don't understand is they are using our laws against us, and only a Democrat would approve.

Your constant fall back position. Be scared. LOL

Every single person born here could be the next mass murderer but that does not change the Constitution.

No need for the Constitution to be changed, just interpreted properly. It's not about being scared, it's about being smart. If one of these anchor babies allowed to be born here by our government, comes back and performs another 911 or worse, the first thing people will be asking is how were we stupid enough to not stop it when we had the chance. The answer of course will be--Democrats.

Obviously it does not take being born here to pull off a 9-11. Funny thing is, you support the reason they would want to come here to pull off another 9-11.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I still doubt if Trumps ban on pregnant women will survive a court challenge

Why not? What part of the Constitution is it violating?