Judge Boardman ignored facts when blocking Trump’s E.O. “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship”.

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Well, I laid out the very specifics HERE why Boardman is either lying, or is incompetent to be a federal judge when she wrote:

It is neither the “law”, nor “tradition” that “. . . virtually every baby born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen upon birth.” It is by existing unwritten federal “policy”, but not by the law or tradition as I have demonstrated.

Judge Boardman apparently disagrees with Trump changing existing federal public policy and has used her office of public trust to obstruct changing public policy which the people approved of when electing Trump. Therefore, Boardman is also subjugating the very purpose of our elections, which are designed to accommodate for change by consent of the people and their vote.

You gave your opinion without any good evidence.

The citizenship will stay.

 

[Moonglow]

Analogies are not identical comparisons
You are uneducated

Which makes it illogical.

 

[Moonglow]

Well, I laid out the very specifics HERE why Boardman is either lying, or is incompetent to be a federal judge when she wrote:

It is neither the “law”, nor “tradition” that “. . . virtually every baby born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen upon birth.” It is by existing unwritten federal “policy”, but not by the law or tradition as I have demonstrated.

Judge Boardman apparently disagrees with Trump changing existing federal public policy and has used her office of public trust to obstruct changing public policy which the people approved of when electing Trump. Therefore, Boardman is also subjugating the very purpose of our elections, which are designed to accommodate for change by consent of the people and their vote.

How else do you get an answer to a question.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

How else do you get an answer to a question.

johnwk, you were taught right from wrong. you also know what corruption is. Give up MAGA.

 

[WEATHER53]

Which makes it illogical.

Analogies never compare exact kind things but rather draw from a variety .
That’s how it’s always has been. You are unlearned.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Analogies never compare exact kind things but rather draw from a variety .
That’s how it’s always has been. You are unlearned.

You do not understand what you just wrote.

 

[johnwk]

You gave your opinion without any good evidence.

That is not true. I gave substantial documentation as follows:

Judge Boardman in blocking Trump’s Executive Order relies on three cases (United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898); Regan v. King, 49 F. Supp. 222 (N.D. Cal. 1942); and GEE FOOK SING v. UNITED STATES, (1892)). In neither of those cases was the United States Supreme Court called upon to determine if a child born on American soil to an illegal entrant foreign national, is a U.S. citizen upon birth.

But in Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U.S. 698, 707 (1893), the court noted the Naturalization Clause of the U.S. Constitution states that “The Congress shall have power ... [t]o establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization.” U.S. Constitution Article 1, section 8, and went on to observe that the Naturalization Clause reflects the fundamental proposition, inherent in sovereignty, that “[e]very society possesses the undoubted right to determine who shall compose its members.”

Also note that under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress, not our Supreme Court, is authorized to enforce the amendment by "appropriate legislation" and that includes granting birthright citizenship to specifically identified groups as it did under the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, and earlier by CHAP. CCCXXXII. - An Act to abolish the tribal Relations of the Miami Indians, March, 1873. And for other Purposes which set specific conditions to be met to be granted United States citizenship. . .( at the above link enter 673 in box at top and press “Enter” on your keyboard)

“SEC. 3.

That if-any adult member of said tribe shall desire to become a citizen of the United States, shall prove by at least two competent witnesses, to the satisfaction of the circuit court of the United States for the State of Kansas, that he or she is sufficiently intelligent and prudent to manage his or her own affairs, and has, for the period of five years, been able to maintain himself or herself and family, and has adopted the habits of civilized life, and shall take an oath of allegiance to the United States, as provided by law for the naturalization of aliens, he or she shall be declared by said court to be a citizen of the United States, which shall be entered of record and-a certificate thereof given to said party.”

Additionally, our United States Supreme Court noted in 1872 in the Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36: The phrase 'subject to its jurisdiction' was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States."

A few years after the above mentioned case, Richard Greisser born on American soil, whose father was a "German subject" at the time of Richard’s birth, was found to not be “. . . a citizen of the United States . . .” SOURCE



So, when Judge Boardman asserts "We need not till the same ground more than a century later..." she blatantly exhibits an intentional defiance and negligence to abide by a fundamental duty stated by our Supreme Court: The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it._____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)

 

[WEATHER53]

You do not understand what you just wrote.

Explain to me and my critic how “all cats have whiskers but not all whisked things are cats” is incorrect and nonsense

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

That is not true. I gave substantial documentation as follows:

Judge Boardman in blocking Trump’s Executive Order relies on three cases (United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898); Regan v. King, 49 F. Supp. 222 (N.D. Cal. 1942); and GEE FOOK SING v. UNITED STATES, (1892)). In neither of those cases was the United States Supreme Court called upon to determine if a child born on American soil to an illegal entrant foreign national, is a U.S. citizen upon birth.

But in Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U.S. 698, 707 (1893), the court noted the Naturalization Clause of the U.S. Constitution states that “The Congress shall have power ... [t]o establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization.” U.S. Constitution Article 1, section 8, and went on to observe that the Naturalization Clause reflects the fundamental proposition, inherent in sovereignty, that “[e]very society possesses the undoubted right to determine who shall compose its members.”

Also note that under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress, not our Supreme Court, is authorized to enforce the amendment by "appropriate legislation" and that includes granting birthright citizenship to specifically identified groups as it did under the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, and earlier by CHAP. CCCXXXII. - An Act to abolish the tribal Relations of the Miami Indians, March, 1873. And for other Purposes which set specific conditions to be met to be granted United States citizenship. . .( at the above link enter 673 in box at top and press “Enter” on your keyboard)

“SEC. 3.

That if-any adult member of said tribe shall desire to become a citizen of the United States, shall prove by at least two competent witnesses, to the satisfaction of the circuit court of the United States for the State of Kansas, that he or she is sufficiently intelligent and prudent to manage his or her own affairs, and has, for the period of five years, been able to maintain himself or herself and family, and has adopted the habits of civilized life, and shall take an oath of allegiance to the United States, as provided by law for the naturalization of aliens, he or she shall be declared by said court to be a citizen of the United States, which shall be entered of record and-a certificate thereof given to said party.”

Additionally, our United States Supreme Court noted in 1872 in the Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36: The phrase 'subject to its jurisdiction' was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States."

A few years after the above mentioned case, Richard Greisser born on American soil, whose father was a "German subject" at the time of Richard’s birth, was found to not be “. . . a citizen of the United States . . .” SOURCE



So, when Judge Boardman asserts "We need not till the same ground more than a century later..." she blatantly exhibits an intentional defiance and negligence to abide by a fundamental duty stated by our Supreme Court: The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it._____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)

Those are opinions not accepted by the Courts. The "intentional defiance and negilgence to abide buy a fundamental duty" is demonstrated by anchor baby opponents. No one has to agree with a differing party's discernment "to the intent of the framers and the people who adopted it" if the Court says otherwise.

Tough.

That's how this works.

We will wait for Scotus. I do not think you have a devil's chance of success in an evangelical pastors' conference.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

It's funny how people randomly posting on a chat site believe they are more qualified to determine legal matters than those who do it daily.

The President’s novel interpretation of the Citizenship Clause contradicts the plain language

The plain language. You want judges to interpret it as opposed to ruling on what it said.

Hypocritely at that.

Leftist judges rule on feelings and politics the vast majority of the time.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Leftist judges rule on feelings and politics the vast majority of the time.

You, my little friend, are one of the most feelingst goof on the board.

 

[johnwk]

Those are opinions not accepted by the Courts.

In fact, our Supreme Court confirms (Slaughter-House Cases) “The phrase ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.”

And, a few years after the above mentioned case, Richard Greisser, born on American soil, whose father was a “German subject” at the time of Richard’s birth, was found to not be “. . . a citizen of the United States . . .” SOURCE

So, once again you are proven to be full of . . . . baloney

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

In fact, our Supreme Court confirms (Slaughter-House Cases) “The phrase ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.”

And, a few years after the above mentioned case, Richard Greisser, born on American soil, whose father was a “German subject” at the time of Richard’s birth, was found to not be “. . . a citizen of the United States . . .” SOURCE

So, once again you are proven to be full of . . . . baloney

Not accepted by the courts on the matter about which your are shitting razor blades. You will simply bleed out emotionally.

 

[johnwk]

Not accepted by the courts on the matter about which your are shitting razor blades. You will simply bleed out emotionally.

Truth and facts are not you friend:


Judge Boardman wrote: “Today, virtually every baby born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen upon birth. That is the law . . . “



FACT: There is no provision in our constitution or Act passed by Congress declaring, “. . . every baby born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen upon birth.”

FACT: Our United States Supreme Court noted in 1872 in the Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36: “The phrase ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States."

FACT: A few years after the above mentioned case (Slaughter-House Cases), Richard Greisser born on American soil, whose father was a “German subject” at the time of Richard’s birth, was found to not be “. . . a citizen of the United States . . .” SOURCE

CONCLUSION: If no constitutional provision can be pointed to which declares “. . . every baby born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen upon birth…” and our very own Supreme Court confirms the phrase “… and subject to the jurisdiction thereof . . . “, “. . . was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States [which obviously includes a child born to an illegal entrant foreign national] born within the United States," then unwritten federal public policy, not law, apparently recognizes “. . . every baby born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen upon birth.”

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Judge Boardman is on good judicial ground.

 

[johnwk]

Judge Boardman is on good judicial ground.

You offer opinions, unsubstantiated by documented facts.


The truth is, Judge Boardman lied and misrepresented the facts when she wrote . . . “Today, virtually every baby born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen upon birth. That is the law and tradition of our country.”

With regard to Boardman’s assertion about the “tradition of our country”, let us recall what Representative BURKE says during our Nations` first debate on a RULE OF NATURALIZATION, FEB. 3RD, 1790

"Mr. BURKE thought it of importance to fill the country with useful men, such as farmers, mechanics, and manufacturers, and, therefore, would hold out every encouragement to them to emigrate to America. This class he would receive on liberal terms; and he was satisfied there would be room enough for them, and for their posterity, for five hundred years to come. There was another class of men, whom he did not think useful, and he did not care what impediments were thrown in their way; such as your European merchants, and factors of merchants, who come with a view of remaining so long as will enable them to acquire a fortune, and then they will leave the country, and carry off all their property with them. These people injure us more than they do us good, and, except in this last sentiment, I can compare them to nothing but leeches. They stick to us until they get their fill of our best blood, and then they fall off and leave us. I look upon the privilege of an American citizen to be an honorable one, and it ought not to be thrown away upon such people. There is another class also that I would interdict, that is, the convicts and criminals which they pour out of British jails. I wish sincerely some mode could be adopted to prevent the importation of such; but that, perhaps, is not in our power; the introduction of them ought to be considered as a high misdemeanor. "

Now, as to the “law”, if I am in error, that there is no such “law”, post the wording that is in our Constitution, or the statutory “law” which was passed by Congress, granting United States citizenship to ". . . every baby born on U.S. soil . . . "

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

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

You offer opinions, unsubstantiated by documented facts.


The truth is, Judge Boardman lied and misrepresented the facts when she wrote . . . “Today, virtually every baby born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen upon birth. That is the law and tradition of our country.”

With regard to Boardman’s assertion about the “tradition of our country”, let us recall what Representative BURKE says during our Nations` first debate on a RULE OF NATURALIZATION, FEB. 3RD, 1790

"Mr. BURKE thought it of importance to fill the country with useful men, such as farmers, mechanics, and manufacturers, and, therefore, would hold out every encouragement to them to emigrate to America. This class he would receive on liberal terms; and he was satisfied there would be room enough for them, and for their posterity, for five hundred years to come. There was another class of men, whom he did not think useful, and he did not care what impediments were thrown in their way; such as your European merchants, and factors of merchants, who come with a view of remaining so long as will enable them to acquire a fortune, and then they will leave the country, and carry off all their property with them. These people injure us more than they do us good, and, except in this last sentiment, I can compare them to nothing but leeches. They stick to us until they get their fill of our best blood, and then they fall off and leave us. I look upon the privilege of an American citizen to be an honorable one, and it ought not to be thrown away upon such people. There is another class also that I would interdict, that is, the convicts and criminals which they pour out of British jails. I wish sincerely some mode could be adopted to prevent the importation of such; but that, perhaps, is not in our power; the introduction of them ought to be considered as a high misdemeanor. "

Now, as to the “law”, if I am in error, that there is no such “law”, post the wording that is in our Constitution, or the statutory “law” which was passed by Congress, granting United States citizenship to ". . . every baby born on U.S. soil . . . "

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

SCOTUS, as you cannot refute, does not agree.

 

[d0gbreath]

I guess the value of American citizenship is currently 5 million smackeroos.

 

[j-mac]

SCOTUS, as you cannot refute, does not agree.

We shall see…You don’t speak for them.

 

[j-mac]

I guess the value of American citizenship is currently 5 million smackeroos.

You got the cash?