Birthright Citizenship…Arguments to begin this week at the Supreme Court.

[postman]

Enact legislatively and then use legal jurisdiction to enforce them.

They're not the same thing.

Legal jurisdiction is completely within the Venn diagram of Sovereign jurisdiction.

 

[postman]

They would tell you our democracy depends on it! That immigration and an open door and welcoming arms is what made America great.

Too bad they are never 1/10th as interested in fighting for us actual Americans already here and citizens of this country to have secure borders, freedom from competition from foreign labor, low crime, and laws fairly adjudicated.

Because they choose to fight at the top of the slippery slope.

 

[postman]

And there you are dead wrong. If the letter and INTENT of a law is not considered in its interpretation, then malicious people will reinterpret it to be anything they want it to be.

As you are other leftists are doing here and elsewhere.

If the law says you need at least TWO people in the vehicle to use the HOV lane.
You will not win an argument that your dog or cat constitutes a second person.

No matter how creative you try to be in defining a person.

 

[Foxfyre]

If the law says you need at least TWO people in the vehicle to use the HOV lane.
You will not win an argument that your dog or cat constitutes a second person.

No matter how creative you try to be in defining a person.

I suppose you think that is a valid comparison. FYI, it isn't.

 

[postman]

I suppose you think that is a valid comparison. FYI, it isn't.

There is a well established definition of jurisdiction (both sovereign and legal) which basically overlap.

And those subject to jurisdiction are everyone except diplomats, indians (not taxed), and invading armies.

All others, subject to our laws (meaning we can punish them) are under our jurisdiction.

 

[Delldude]

Legal jurisdiction is completely within the Venn diagram of Sovereign jurisdiction.

You're the gift that just keeps on giving......

AI Overview
No, sovereign jurisdiction and legal jurisdiction are not the same, though they are related. Sovereignty refers to a state's supreme power and authority, while legal jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court or legal entity to hear and adjudicate cases within a specific area or over certain types of matters.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is a well established definition of jurisdiction (both sovereign and legal) which basically overlap.

And those subject to jurisdiction are everyone except diplomats, indians (not taxed), and invading armies.

All others, subject to our laws (meaning we can punish them) are under our jurisdiction.

Your interpretation. Not the interpretation of those who wrote and passed the laws.

 

[postman]

You're the gift that just keeps on giving......

AI Overview
No, sovereign jurisdiction and legal jurisdiction are not the same, though they are related. Sovereignty refers to a state's supreme power and authority, while legal jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court or legal entity to hear and adjudicate cases within a specific area or over certain types of matters.

The sovereign runs the legal system.

 

[postman]

Your interpretation. Not the interpretation of those who wrote and passed the laws.

That's the current and longstanding legal definition, which is what laws go by.

It's no different than if the law says shall be fined $500,
Even if the lawmakers intended for the fine to be optional.
The judge has to interpret shall by the legal definition of shall.

 

[Delldude]

The sovereign runs the legal system.

The basis.

 

[WEATHER53]

Divining what is in the Constitution by strict construction is wrong. Jefferson said it best: "On every question of construction (of the Constitution) let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit of the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed,"

Intent should take precedence over words...every time.

Or inverted against it is exactly what lib loons are trying

 

[SweetTea]

There is a well established definition of jurisdiction (both sovereign and legal) which basically overlap.

And those subject to jurisdiction are everyone except diplomats, indians (not taxed), and invading armies.

All others, subject to our laws (meaning we can punish them) are under our jurisdiction.

I would argue that illegal aliens are very similar to an invading army.

 

[WEATHER53]

I would argue that illegal aliens are very similar to an invading army.

It’s an invasion even if not a military one

 

[Delldude]

I would argue that illegal aliens are very similar to an invading army.

That's the gang theory.

 

[Unkotare]

...a Honduran couple is passing through the USA on their way to Canada and plunk out a child...

Were you "plunked out," or were you born?

 

[Unkotare]

...their child owes its allegiance to the same territory as from which the parents came, not America.

You should call the US Supreme Court and tell them they can take a vacation now that YOU have unilaterally changed the Constitution.

 

[Unkotare]

Someone on this thread actually posted the words "freedom from competition." I haven't read anything so shamelessly un-American in quite some time. If whoever typed those words is a male of the species, he had better just turn in his nuts and go home.

 

[jwoodie]

The issue is whether children born to parents who have ILLEGALLY entered the US AUTOMATICALLY become US CITIZENS.

The Wong case did NOT involve this situation because both parents were here LEGALLY.

The 14th Amendment was intended to effectively repeal the original Constitution's 3/5 calculation for congressional representation and other references to slavery. In order to do so, it used exactly the same terminology ("persons") as the original text. This was also used to clarify the citizenship status of the children born to former slaves, not to confer citizenship on the children of people who were temporarily/illegally visiting the US.

P.S. The term "persons" was used in the Constitution's original text because there was no such thing as "citizens" prior to its adoption.

 

[Delldude]

Were you "plunked out," or were you born?

After having one in the oven for nine months, it could be plopped, popped, plunked or born, depending on your interpretation.

 

[postman]

The basis.

No, they actually run it.
They build the courthouses, they pay the judges, the clerks, they send out jury notices.