- Apr 11, 2023
- 39,701
- 19,646
- 1,788
Does not matter, Sam.Pssst, the EO applies equally to white, brown, yellow ... illegals.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Does not matter, Sam.Pssst, the EO applies equally to white, brown, yellow ... illegals.
You can deport any illegal in violation of the law. That has nothing to do with a child's birthright citizenship.
All courts including the top will rule Trump's EO is out of bounds.
Not allowing pregnant foreign women to give birth in America is constitutionalYou can deport any illegal in violation of the law. That has nothing to do with a child's birthright citizenship.
All courts including the top will rule Trump's EO is out of bounds.
Seems it matters a great deal to Ms. Jones.Does not matter, Sam.
No benefits accrued from fruits of the poisoned treeDoubtful, illegal is illegal
You also predicted that Kamala would win. How'd that work out for ya?You can deport any illegal in violation of the law. That has nothing to do with a child's birthright citizenship.
All courts including the top will rule Trump's EO is out of bounds.
No one is quarreling with that.Not allowing pregnant foreign women to give birth in America is constitutional
Which is a different issue from Trump’s ban on birthright citizenship
Only in your loopy head.No benefits accrued from fruits of the poisoned tree
Stellar analogy and recognized by courts for ages as another function of Law that lib loons despise
Of course I have. There is no “right to have an American citizen child,” and the unborn baby is just a clump of cells with no right to live, much less to be an American.You have not made a point at all here.
That argument may win out. We’ll see what the USSC says.Sur it does. The illegal criminal is subject to US jurisdiction, so a child born in the US is a citizen.
No. In order to under the jurisdiction, you simply must be in the jurisdiction. That's why anybody on US soil can be arrested for crimes committed in the US.In order for someone to be subject to the jurisdiction and benefit, do they not have to be a legal citizen?
The constitution does not apply to Mexicans in Mexico and when they illegally come here it does not seem likely that constitutionality of citizenship confers to an unborn child when it’s born
Then why doesn’t the 14th of the constitution say “in the jurisdiction?”No. In order to under the jurisdiction, you simply must be in the jurisdiction. That's why anybody on US soil can be arrested for crimes committed in the US.
It says "subject to", which the courts have decided is sufficient. They have determined the proffered Seymour Flops codicil is not acceptable.Then why doesn’t the 14th of the constitution say “in the jurisdiction?”
In a USSC case about illegals having babies?It says "subject to", which the courts have decided is sufficient. They have determined the proffered Seymour Flops codicil is not acceptable.
Well, it does happen in a number of countries, mostly in the western hemisphere where immigrants settled in the last 600 years.Ahhhhh, the wild screeching of the progressive fascists....
Music to my ears!
As to the pregnant women....no, they don't get to come to our country and drop a baby and become legal overnight.
It doesn't work like that in ANY country on Earth.
So it shouldn't happen here.
Anchor babies do not exist. Parents of children born here can and will be deported. Where is the anchor part?Hence anchor baby.
With the exception of diplomats having immunity because they are not subject to US jurisdiction.No. In order to under the jurisdiction, you simply must be in the jurisdiction. That's why anybody on US soil can be arrested for crimes committed in the US.
Well, except for the fact that when the 14th Amendment was ratified, there was no such thing as an illegal immigrant.Doubtful, illegal is illegal