18 Democrat State Attorneys General Sue to Stop Trump’s Executive Order on Birthright Citizenship

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I want the SCOTUS to see it the right way whether it's our way or not. There's got to be some restraint on presidential power, Biden went too far IMHO with his student loan forgiveness for just about everybody, and I think Trump is going too far with his deportation for all illegals policy. I wish Congress would do their effing job and pass laws for this issue, but they can't seem to agree on anything except spending more money that they don't have. Absent that however, what should happen?

Finish the effing wall and make it harder to get in illegally. There's no point in deporting anybody if they can just walk right back in tomorrow. Funding needs to be allocated to finding and demolishing illegal points of entry, be it tunnels or whatever. Drop a couple of those MOABs on a few tunnels see if the message resonates. We oughta be able to monitor the hot spots along the border and deter entry. For the catch and release folks, if they don't show up for their appointed court date then go find them and kick them out. If you are an illegal and you commit a crime, you're gone. If it's a serious problem then we should devote serious time and money to it.

You really don't understand MOABs, do you? That would be a few orders of magnitude above overkill.

 

[toobfreak]

I merely corrected your error. Don't get all bent out of shape because I insulted that dome of yours.

**** off, Jackass. That is all you ever do is look for opportunities to correct anyone's error as a means to put others down trying to make yourself appear smart. Go suck mule ass, Dingwad. It is the only time you ever speak up.

 

[toobfreak]

You really don't understand MOABs, do you? That would be a few orders of magnitude above overkill.

Like I just said. **** off, Jackass. That is all you ever do is look for opportunities to correct anyone's error as a means to put others down trying to make yourself appear smart. Go suck mule ass, Dingwad. It is the only time you ever speak up.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

**** off, Jackass. That is all you ever do is look for opportunities to correct anyone's error as a means to put others down trying to make yourself appear smart. Go suck mule ass, Dingwad. It is the only time you ever speak up.

That's because you offer a plethora of opportunities because you are simply stupid.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Like I just said. **** off, Jackass. That is all you ever do is look for opportunities to correct anyone's error as a means to put others down trying to make yourself appear smart. Go suck mule ass, Dingwad. It is the only time you ever speak up.

I didn't realize I was addressing your ignorance in that post. Still having problems with your reading? There is a cure for that.

 

[toobfreak]

That's because you offer a plethora of opportunities because you are simply stupid.

Suck ass, Jackass. That is all you ever do is look for opportunities to correct anyone's error as a means to put others down trying to make yourself appear smart while slipping them an insult. It is the only time you ever speak up so as to never present any "opportunity" for anyone to correct you.

Let me guess, you're simply never wrong, right, butthump?! Eat my shit and choke. You're nothing but a total fraud.

 

[toobfreak]

I didn't realize I was addressing your ignorance in that post. Still having problems with your reading? There is a cure for that.

Exactly, asslick. You are now on perma-Ignore. Bye, "Admiral." Probably never really anything more than seaman first class.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Suck ass, Jackass. That is all you ever do is look for opportunities to correct anyone's error as a means to put others down trying to make yourself appear smart while slipping them an insult. It is the only time you ever speak up so as to never present any "opportunity" for anyone to correct you.

Let me guess, you're simply never wrong, right, butthump?! Eat my shit and choke. You're nothing but a total fraud.

I love it when I soin you up. You deserve every ounce of ridicule.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Exactly, asslick. You are now on perma-Ignore. Bye, "Admiral." Probably never really anything more than seaman first class.

At least I know how a diode works.

 

[johnwk]

We need to resolve this issue. Hopefully the SC will see it our way.

Why Trump’s birthright citizenship Executive Order is constitutional​

Under the 14th Amendment’s, Section 5, Congress has exclusive power to enforce its provisions by “appropriate legislation” and did so under the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. As we speak, there is no S.C. Case, or Act of Congress by which citizenship is recognized for the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born while on American soil. Doing so is mere unwritten federal policy.

Under Article 2 of our Constitution, our President gets to exercise administrative policy changes, such as was exercised by Biden with his disastrous and destructive open border policy.

This policy making authority of our President, is a hallmark of our Republican Form of Government, which also provides for elections in order to accommodate change of existing public policy, as determined by the people through elections.

Since our Constitution does not grant citizenship to the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born while on American soil, nor has Congress acted to grant such citizenship, or does a Supreme Court case exist in which this question was explicitly presented to our Supreme Court for consideration and affirmed such citizenship, and that mere federal policy has recognized the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born while on American soil as citizens of the United States, President Trump is free to exercise his administrative policy-making power, so long as it does not violate any provisions of our Constitution, and he may change existing federal policy which has recognized the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born while on American soil as citizens of the United States upon birth.

Our S.C. does not have to get involved, nor should it! It should only confirm, elections have consequences, and our President has power to change existing public policy.

Elections have consequences!​

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Why Trump’s birthright citizenship Executive Order is constitutional​

Under the 14th Amendment’s, Section 5, Congress has exclusive power to enforce its provisions by “appropriate legislation” and did so under the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. As we speak, there is no S.C. Case, or Act of Congress by which citizenship is recognized for the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born while on American soil. Doing so is mere unwritten federal policy.

Under Article 2 of our Constitution, our President gets to exercise administrative policy changes, such as was exercised by Biden with his disastrous and destructive open border policy.

This policy making authority of our President, is a hallmark of our Republican Form of Government, which also provides for elections in order to accommodate change of existing public policy, as determined by the people through elections.

Since our Constitution does not grant citizenship to the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born while on American soil, nor has Congress acted to grant such citizenship, or does a Supreme Court case exist in which this question was explicitly presented to our Supreme Court for consideration and affirmed such citizenship, and that mere federal policy has recognized the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born while on American soil as citizens of the United States, President Trump is free to exercise his administrative policy-making power, so long as it does not violate any provisions of our Constitution, and he may change existing federal policy which has recognized the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born while on American soil as citizens of the United States upon birth.

Our S.C. does not have to get involved, nor should it! It should only confirm, elections have consequences, and our President has power to change existing public policy.

Elections have consequences!​

I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you!

 

[Captain Caveman]

The question should be, do they have standing? I say no, they do not.

But we see over and over how Democrats care nothing for the American people and want to subdue us with overwhelming numbers of foreign born women coming here illegally, popping out a baby, thus an 'anchor baby', and neither baby not mommy can be removed.

In fact, this begins chain migration where those two will become 10, 20, 30, 40, or more over a decade or so.

What other nation allows this? None.

Yes, in the UK the child doesn't automatically become British -

Children Born in the UK to Illegal Immigrants

Children born in the UK to illegal immigrants may be able to apply for limited leave to remain, indefinite leave to remain (ILR), or citizenship. Learn the different routes available to you.

immigrationlawyers-london.com

To do so is daft.

 

[johnwk]

I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you!

Posting truth and facts has nothing to do with one holding their breath. Is that your adolescent comment for the day, or is there more to come?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Posting truth and facts has nothing to do with one holding their breath. Is that your adolescent comment for the day, or is there more to come?

You post opinions disguised as facts because you have no real facts. That is all.

 

[johnwk]

You post opinions disguised as facts because you have no real facts. That is all.

So, you are back to the Kabuki Dance and avoid a mature dialogue. What I posted are truth and facts.

Why Trump’s birthright citizenship Executive Order is constitutional​

Under the 14th Amendment’s, Section 5, Congress has exclusive power to enforce its provisions by “appropriate legislation” and did so under the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. As we speak, there is no S.C. Case, or Act of Congress by which citizenship is recognized for the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born while on American soil. Doing so is mere unwritten federal policy.

Under Article 2 of our Constitution, our President gets to exercise administrative policy changes, such as was exercised by Biden with his disastrous and destructive open border policy.

This policy making authority of our President, is a hallmark of our Republican Form of Government, which also provides for elections in order to accommodate change of existing public policy, as determined by the people through elections.

Since our Constitution does not grant citizenship to the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born while on American soil, nor has Congress acted to grant such citizenship, or does a Supreme Court case exist in which this question was explicitly presented to our Supreme Court for consideration and affirmed such citizenship, and that mere federal policy has recognized the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born while on American soil as citizens of the United States, President Trump is free to exercise his administrative policy-making power, so long as it does not violate any provisions of our Constitution, and he may change existing federal policy which has recognized the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born while on American soil as citizens of the United States upon birth.

Our S.C. does not have to get involved, nor should it! It should only confirm, elections have consequences, and our President has power to change existing public policy.

Elections have consequences!​

 

[luiza]

18 Democrat State Attorneys General Sue​

More amazing American news .

What are the odds that each of the 18 Democrat AGs would have the same Christian name of Sue ?
And how many of them were men ?

 

[johnwk]

18 Democrat State Attorneys General Sue​

More amazing American news .

What are the odds that each of the 18 Democrat AGs would have the same Christian name of Sue ?
And how many of them were men ?

Their LAWSUIT is based upon misrepresentations and a re-write of historical facts.

To substantiate their claim, Plaintiffs argue that the Fourteenth Amendment was intended to confer citizenship upon any person born on American soil. Plaintiffs assert “. . . when proposing the language of the Citizenship Clause to the Senate, Senator Jacob M. Howard of Michigan explained that, “[t]his amendment … is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is … a citizen of the United States.”

Keep in mind Howard’s comment does not address the important question of what is meant by “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”, and that omission is in addition to Plaintiffs suspiciously avoiding the inclusion of Senator Reverdy Johnson’s clarification of the Fourteenth Amendment. Senator Johnson notes the absolute necessity connected to citizenship upon birth as follows:

[A]ll that this amendment provides is, that all persons born in the United States and not subject to some foreign Power—for that, no doubt, is the meaning of the committee who have brought the matter before us—shall be considered as citizens of the United States. That would seem to be not only a wise but a necessary provision. If there are to be citizens of the United States entitled everywhere to the character of citizens of the United States there should be some certain definition of what citizenship is, what has created the character of citizen as between himself and the United States, and the amendment says that citizenship may depend upon birth, and I know of no better way to give rise to citizenship than the fact of birth within the territory of the United States, born of parents who at the time were subject to the authority of the United States.”

Parents who are subject to the authority of the United States, within the meaning of the Fourteenth, enjoy political privileges such as voting, and have military service obligations when called upon, which is not the case of parents who are foreign nationals, and especially of foreign nationals who illegally enter the United States who give birth to offspring.

Petitioners in claiming the Fourteenth Amendment was intended to confer citizenship upon "any person" born on American soil gloss over the intended purpose and meaning of the qualifier “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” and they dismiss the qualifier as being relating only to “tribal members and the children of foreign ministers”, when in fact the historical debates of the Fourteenth Amendment show otherwise, in addition to our very own Supreme Court noting in Elk v. Wilkins the Citizenship Clause’s jurisdictional qualifier means “not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiance.”

Finally, Petitioners trout out and rely upon United States v. Wong Kim Ark as confirming “[a]ll persons born” in and “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States…” “. . . entitles a child born in the United States to noncitizen parents to automatic citizenship…”. What Petitioners disingenuously omit is that the parents of Wong were Chinese immigrants who were legally living in the U.S., had established and enjoyed a permanent domicile and residence in the U.S. and were carry on a business. The Court, in Wong, did not consider citizenship with respect to the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals, who certainly are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States within the well documented meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The bottom line for rejecting the lawsuit against Trump’s PROTECTING THE MEANING AND VALUE OF AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP is, to date Congress has not exercised its Section V exclusive power under the Fourteenth Amendment to recognize and grant citizenship to the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born on American soil, nor has there been a Supreme Court case called to decide if a child born on American soil to an illegal entrant foreign national is a U.S. citizen upon birth. The fact is, mere current and unwritten policy, not law, now recognizes them as such.


Our current president, under Article 2 of our Constitution, has administrative power allowing him to set new public policy ___ just as Biden did with his open border policy that has caused great harm to the United States.

President Trump has acted within the law, and exercised his administrative policy-making-power, so the offspring of an illegal entrant born on American soil will no longer be recognized as a citizen of the United States upon birth.

Elections have consequences, and part of the consequences of an election allows the setting new public policy . . . this is a fundamental hallmark of our constitutionally limited "Republican Form of Government" guaranteed by our Constitution.

If the State Plaintiffs do not like the lawfully adopted new policy their remedy is to be found under Article V of our Constitution, not through judicial lawfair, and they ought to propose a constitutional amendment declaring, as suggested in their lawsuit, that all persons born in the United States, regardless of their parent's citizenship or entry into the United States, are heretofore citizens of the United states" and would thus entitle them to all welfare benefits including programs administered by the States and jointly funded by federal and state dollars [see page 21 of their lawsuit] and explains what their lawsuit is really about . . . free government cheese provided by American citizen taxpayers.

JWK

“If aliens might be admitted indiscriminately to enjoy all the rights of citizens at the will of a single state, the Union might itself be endangered by an influx of foreigners, hostile to its institutions, ignorant of its powers, and incapable of a due estimate of its privileges." - Joseph Story

 

[luiza]

Their LAWSUIT is based upon misrepresentations and a re-write of historical facts.

You better re-read my post and put on your thinking cap .

As we say . Some Mothers Do Have Them

 

[johnwk]

You better re-read my post and put on your thinking cap .

As we say . Some Mothers Do Have Them

Perhaps you ought to just explain what you mean rather than being illusive.

 

[Cellblock2429]

The question should be, do they have standing? I say no, they do not.

But we see over and over how Democrats care nothing for the American people and want to subdue us with overwhelming numbers of foreign born women coming here illegally, popping out a baby, thus an 'anchor baby', and neither baby not mommy can be removed.

In fact, this begins chain migration where those two will become 10, 20, 30, 40, or more over a decade or so.

What other nation allows this? None.

​

President Trump declared a national border emergency as one of his first official acts as the 47th US President on Monday.​

​

Trump also signed an executive order ending birthright citizenship.​

​

According to President Trump’s order, the 14th Amendment is being misinterpreted by the left to give citizenship to ‘anchor babies.’​

​

“It is the policy of the United States that no department or agency of the United States government shall issue documents recognizing United States citizenship, or accept documents issued by State, local, or other governments or authorities purporting to recognize United States citizenship, to persons: (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth,” Trump’s order stated.​

​

Trump’s order argued the 14th Amendment has always excluded babies born to people in the US illegally.​

​

“[The] Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States. The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Consistent with this understanding, the Congress has further specified through legislation that “a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is a national and citizen of the United States at birth, 8 U.S.C. 1401, generally mirroring the Fourteenth Amendment’s text,” the order stated.​

​

On Tuesday, Democrat state attorneys general filed a lawsuit to halt Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship.​

​

...​

IT BEGINS: 18 Democrat State Attorneys General Sue to Stop Trump's Executive Order on Birthright Citizenship | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

Eighteen Democratic state attorneys general have united in a lawsuit challenging President Trump's executive order aimed at altering birthright citizenship, arguing it violates constitutional principles and threatens the rights of American-born children.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

/----/ What Libtards can't understand is “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means that the non-citizen must owe full allegiance to the United States and to no other country.
To dumb it down enough for Trump haters to understand, if a woman who is a citizen of Mexico gives birth on US soil, that child is not automatically a US citizen BECAUSE the mother is a full citizen of Mexico, not the US.

Libs, you may need to reread this multiple times to grasp the meaning.