Trump and "Anchor Babies"

[Skylar]

" Anchor Baby Fraud Thievery By Hostile Agents Thwarting Subject To Legal Jurisdiction "

'Hostile agents' says you, citing the same imaginary pseudo-legal batshit you made up.

No court, nor any US law has ever found illegal immigrants are 'hostile agents'. What's the use of a legal argument that no court nor law recognizes? You might as well be one of those sovereign citizen idiots babbling about the fringes on flags.

Is that really all you have? You, making shit up, backed by nothing and contradicted by the courts? As Wong makes it very clear when reviewing the legal foundation of birth right citizeship:

Children, born in England, of such aliens were therefore natural-born subjects. But the children, born within the realm, of foreign ambassadors, or the children of alien enemies, born during and within their hostile occupation of part of the King's dominions, were not natural-born subjects because not born within the allegiance, the obedience, or the power, or, as would be said at this day, within the jurisdiction, of the King."

US v. Wong Kim Ark (1898)

You have no rational retort to this founded in caselaw or US law. But instead, the wasteland of ignorance also known as your imagination.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Legal Wrangling Nothing New "

* Pretending Relevance Without A Valid Test *

['Hostile agents' says you, citing the same imaginary pseudo-legal batshit you made up.

All you do is repeat the same nausea that lacks the requisite merit and you state the same about my premises .

There was an investigative report about illegal immigration that included one woman whom had left 3 children in her home country , who had two children in the us and had just had premature triplets that were in neonatal care , and she was blubbering about not being able to find work ; thus , simple facts are that us citizens decide as to what constitutes hostility and anchor babies for social welfare is sufficient .

Fact-checking the claims about 'anchor babies' and whether illegal immigrants 'drop and leave'

Anchor baby - Wikipedia
As of 2015, there has been no Supreme Court decision that explicitly holds that persons born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants are automatically afforded U.S. citizenship.[24][25][26][27][28][29][30]

* Contractual Failure To Commit *

US v. Wong Kim Ark (1898)
You have no rational retort to this founded in caselaw or US law. But instead, the wasteland of ignorance also known as your imagination.

There is a contractual obligation that those without legal migrant status have not subjected themselves to the legal migration system , which means that the illegal sojourners maintain a criminal status through non compliance , that represent a distinct jurisdiction from the contractual obligations of the legal migration system .

Until such time that the us decides to formalize a migrant status as legal by a contractual agreement , the illegal sojourner maintain a criminal status through non compliance and are not subjects of jurisdiction within the us immigration system , rather they are illegal sojourners subject to the criminal justice system .

Contractual term - Wikipedia
Four Categories
If a contract specifies "subject to contract", it may fall into one of three categories as identified in Masters v Cameron:[36]

1. The parties are immediately bound to the bargain, but they intend to restate the deal in a more formalized contract that will not have a different effect; or
2. The parties have completely agreed to the terms, but have made the execution of some terms in the contract conditional on the creation of a formal contract; or
3. It is merely an agreement to agree lacking the requisite intention to create legal relations, and the deal will only be binding unless and until the formalized contract has been drawn up.

Subsequent authorities have been willing to recognize a fourth category in addition to those stated in Masters v Cameron.[37]

1. The parties intend to immediately bound by the terms agreed upon and expect to create a further contract as a replacement for the initial contract which will contain additional terms (if agreed upon).

 

[Unkotare]

Never take anyone seriously who uses wiki as their main source of proof of anything.

 

[danielpalos]

" Legal Wrangling Nothing New "

* Pretending Relevance Without A Valid Test *

['Hostile agents' says you, citing the same imaginary pseudo-legal batshit you made up.

All you do is repeat the same nausea that lacks the requisite merit and you state the same about my premises .

There was an investigative report about illegal immigration that included one woman whom had left 3 children in her home country , who had two children in the us and had just had premature triplets that were in neonatal care , and she was blubbering about not being able to find work ; thus , simple facts are that us citizens decide as to what constitutes hostility and anchor babies for social welfare is sufficient .

Fact-checking the claims about 'anchor babies' and whether illegal immigrants 'drop and leave'

Anchor baby - Wikipedia
As of 2015, there has been no Supreme Court decision that explicitly holds that persons born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants are automatically afforded U.S. citizenship.[24][25][26][27][28][29][30]

* Contractual Failure To Commit *

US v. Wong Kim Ark (1898)
You have no rational retort to this founded in caselaw or US law. But instead, the wasteland of ignorance also known as your imagination.

There is a contractual obligation that those without legal migrant status have not subjected themselves to the legal migration system , which means that the illegal sojourners maintain a criminal status through non compliance , that represent a distinct jurisdiction from the contractual obligations of the legal migration system .

Until such time that the us decides to formalize a migrant status as legal by a contractual agreement , the illegal sojourner maintain a criminal status through non compliance and are not subjects of jurisdiction within the us immigration system , rather they are illegal sojourners subject to the criminal justice system .

Contractual term - Wikipedia
Four Categories
If a contract specifies "subject to contract", it may fall into one of three categories as identified in Masters v Cameron:[36]

1. The parties are immediately bound to the bargain, but they intend to restate the deal in a more formalized contract that will not have a different effect; or
2. The parties have completely agreed to the terms, but have made the execution of some terms in the contract conditional on the creation of a formal contract; or
3. It is merely an agreement to agree lacking the requisite intention to create legal relations, and the deal will only be binding unless and until the formalized contract has been drawn up.

Subsequent authorities have been willing to recognize a fourth category in addition to those stated in Masters v Cameron.[37]

1. The parties intend to immediately bound by the terms agreed upon and expect to create a further contract as a replacement for the initial contract which will contain additional terms (if agreed upon).

natural born is clearly expressed in our Constitution.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Vague Meaning "

* Uncertain Terms *

natural born is clearly expressed in our Constitution.

The term applied in the 14th amendment is naturalized .

 

[Unkotare]

Never take anyone seriously who uses wiki as their main source of proof of anything.

Because you can bet such a person doesn’t know anything.

 

[danielpalos]

" Vague Meaning "

* Uncertain Terms *

natural born is clearly expressed in our Constitution.

The term applied in the 14th amendment is naturalized .

so what; we didn't need our 14th Amendment. Article Four, Section Two covers our exigencies.

 

[mamooth]

I thought this thread would be about the Russian oligarch anchor babies being born at Trump hotels. Trump wants his kleptocrat pals to have kids with American citizenship. That makes it easier to launder the money.

 

[Pellinore]

Yeah, Skylar is right. An undocumented immigrant is still subject to our jurisdiction, because he is within reach of our laws. If he jaywalks or robs a liquor store or shoots someone dead, he can be arrested as easily as you and I, and therefore he is within our jurisdiction. The three expressed exceptions were foreign diplomats and their staff (who had the 19th century equivalent of diplomatic immunity), soldiers in an occupying army, and some Indian tribes, who at the time were treated as foreign nations.

I know it seems silly, and we're in the minority with birthright citizenship, but that's the law as written and many times interpreted.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Political Cowardice The Challenge Jurisprudence "

* Clear And Evident *

dude; Any use of Our law requires it be Constitutional, not merely politically expedient.

The the clause " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " of the us 14th amendment is a subject to contract clause that can be understood to stipulate jurisdiction as legal migrant status , the entire basis of not granting us citizenship and granting the citizenship of the mother to anchor babies is factual and not political expedience .