Making America Great Again: President Trump Seriously Looking At Ending Birthright Citizenship

[danielpalos]

...There are a ton of examples of the government wildly misunderstanding the constitution in its plain writing. The cure is not to continue the asinine practice of simply redefining law when you don't like the outcome. The cure is passing an amendment that fixes those inane interpretations.

Indeed.

Unfortunately, a fresh Amendment is not in the cards.

And, if that's true, then the only way to treat the symptoms is to re-interpret.

Whatever gets the job done - quickly and effectively - and gets us past this latest invasion.

We can touch-up the scratches afterwards.

Getting over this, "latest invasion" should mean abolishing our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror which only create, "invaders."

 

[Correll]

I posted photographic evidence to back up my claim, and all you did was restate your claim.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP LEFTARD.

We explained to you that was during the Iraq invasion the international intervention was just...the American invasion of Iraq years later had no legitimacy. Capiche ?

What you did was post a bunch of shit, full more of partisan jabs and shit, than anything resembling a coherent point.


Are you incapable of doing more, or are you purposefully being a prick?

Dude I bet you cant even point where Iraq is...the whole entire world knows and recognize that the Iraq invasion was illegitimate and even the orange admitted that...and you are arguing with your own stupid unfounded stories.

1. You would lose that bet, asshole.

2. THe rest of the world, is too used to being able to take America for granted. No serious adult person could think that removing Saddam was illegitimate.

3. Not sure why you keep referencing Trump. Unless you are putting him forth as an Authority Figure who's wisdom should be deferred to?

Saddam was a bad Nazi. The United States still did war crimes in Iraq.
Haditha massacre - Wikipedia
Mahmudiyah rape and killings - Wikipedia

You don't have the credibility for me to click on a link. YOu have a point to make, make it, concisely as you can.


What is your point with that post? Just to smear America?

 

[danielpalos]

She meant AIPAC and money...one has to make a clear difference between criticizing lobbies that back Israel and anti semitism.
Example I dont like the regime in Saudi Arabia that doesnt make me islamophobe.

Ilan Omar is a ******* Muslim who wears a hijab a symbol of Muslim oppression of females and theocratic rule which is directly opposed to our Constitution. She refuses to remove that rag. Her comrades are traitors and should be prosecuted as such along with her. You are out of your mind if you think for one minute any one of these cult-religion bitches care about America.

She is oppressed because she wears a hijab and you are the first to attack k and insult her ? Lol you want her half naked to prove that she is not oppressed ? She represents her area and she was elected by Americans....you can go and run against her and try and defeat her democratically.

Nobody wants Muslim women half naked, not even Muslim men! Seriously!

that's right, all the way, baby!

 

[danielpalos]

We explained to you that was during the Iraq invasion the international intervention was just...the American invasion of Iraq years later had no legitimacy. Capiche ?

What you did was post a bunch of shit, full more of partisan jabs and shit, than anything resembling a coherent point.


Are you incapable of doing more, or are you purposefully being a prick?

Dude I bet you cant even point where Iraq is...the whole entire world knows and recognize that the Iraq invasion was illegitimate and even the orange admitted that...and you are arguing with your own stupid unfounded stories.

1. You would lose that bet, asshole.

2. THe rest of the world, is too used to being able to take America for granted. No serious adult person could think that removing Saddam was illegitimate.

3. Not sure why you keep referencing Trump. Unless you are putting him forth as an Authority Figure who's wisdom should be deferred to?

Saddam was a bad Nazi. The United States still did war crimes in Iraq.
Haditha massacre - Wikipedia
Mahmudiyah rape and killings - Wikipedia

You don't have the credibility for me to click on a link. YOu have a point to make, make it, concisely as you can.


What is your point with that post? Just to smear America?

There is no express immigration clause, right wingers. It is about being faithful to our express supreme law of the land.

 

[BS Filter]

Then revoke it legally by a constitutional amendment. There is no basis in fact to assume that birthright citizenship is not the law of the land and the 14th Amendment does grant birthright citizenship. That was explicitly made clear during the debate. James Madison said parentage does not matter as much as location.

The father of the 14th Amendment, Rep. John Bingham, during its framing stated this:

“every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))

Anchor babies are not citizens. They are born with allegiance to their illegal parents country.

A baby who has never been to another country cannot have allegiance to a country they have never been in. Birthright citizenship was a part of this country BEFORE the 14th Amendment. You can give us 1 quote. I can give you a dozen proving my point.

"It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other."
-James Madison 1789

press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_2_2s6.html


"The only standard which then existed [when the Constitution was written],of a natural born citizen, was the rule of common law, and no different standard has been adopted since. Suppose a person should be elected president who was native born, but of alien parents; could there be any reasonable doubt that he was eligible under the Constitution? I think not. The position would be decisive in his favor, that by the rule of the common law, in force when the Constitution was adopted, he is a citizen."
Vice Chancellor Lewis Sandford in Lynch vs Clarke

Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Chancery of the State of New York [1843-1847, Before the Hon. Lewis H. Sandford, Assistant Vice-chancellor of the First Circuit

"In reply to the inquiry which is made by you…whether “the children of foreign parents born in the United States, but brought to the country of which the father is a subject, and continuing to reside within the jurisdiction of their father’s country, are entitled to protection as citizens of the United States,” I have to observe that it is presumed that, according to the common law, any person born in the United States, unless he be born in one of the foreign legations therein, may be considered a citizen thereof until he formally renounces his citizenship. There is not, however any United States statute containing a provision upon this subject, nor, so far as I am aware, has there been any judicial decision in regard to it."
Secretary of State William Learned Mercy

A digest of international law as embodied in diplomatic discussions, treaties and other international agreements

"The Constitution leaves no room for doubt upon this subject. The words ‘natural born citizen of the United states’ appear in it, and the other provision appears in it that, “Congress shall have power to pass a uniform system of naturalization.” To naturalize a person is to admit him to citizenship. Who are natural born citizens but those born within the Republic? Those born within the Republic, whether black or white, are citizens by birth–natural born citizens."
Rep Bingham in 1862

memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=059/llcg059.db&recNum=680

The meaning was very clear during debate.

Mr. COWAN. I will ask whether it will not have the effect of naturalizing the children of Chinese and Gypsies born in this country?

Mr. TRUMBULL. Undoubtedly.

[…]

Mr. TRUMBULL. I should like to inquire of my friend from Pennsylvania, if the children of Chinese now born in this country are not citizens?

Mr. COWAN. I think not.

Mr. TRUMBULL. I understand that under the naturalization laws the children who are born here of parents who have not been naturalized are citizens. That is the law, as I understand it, at the present time. Is not the child born in this country of German parents a citizen? I am afraid we have got very few citizens in some of the counties of good old Pennsylvania if the children born of German parents are not citizens.
A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774 - 1875

James Ho makes a obvious point.
"It is also worth observing that, if the drafters had intended to require allegiance, rather than obedience, they could have said so. How easy it would have been for them to state explicitly that only children born to citizens are guaranteed birthright citizenship—with a simple proviso to address the descendants of slaves. But instead, they chose the language of jurisdiction, not citizenship. And that decision deserves respect."

None of that pertains to anchor babies. The Constitution does not mandate that babies born to illegal immigrants are entitled to birthright citizenship. Show me specifically where in the 14th Amendment it mentions children of Illegal aliens. Show me specific precedent case law ruled by the Supreme Court granting anchor babies of illegal aliens Citizenship. The 14th Amendment does not need to be amended to prohibit birthright citizenship. It merely needs to be interpreted correctly. Constitutional originalism requires interpreting the Constitution the way it was intended when it was written or amended. We know what it meant then, and it did not mean illegal immigrants.

For the hundred-millionth time, when the Constitution was written, when Madison argued for jus soli, there was no such thing as "illegal aliens." If you managed to get here, you could be naturalized or not, but there was no such thing as an "illegal" status.
Times change. This is not two hundred and thirty years ago. Originalism is bullshit. If the Founders wanted the Constitution to be interpreted the same for hundreds of years, they would not have included orderly ways to CHANGE it.

Madison is not the sole authority on granting anchor babies Citizenship, dumbass! Originalist is precedent. That's why Trump picked Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, they're both Constitution originalist who interpret case law based on what the Constitution originally meant at that specific time. Trump will win this, even more so if Ginsburg takes her dirt nap soon, replacing her with Amy Coney Barrett, another Constitution originalist.

If Ginsburg croaks during Trump's presidency, the hearings will be hell on earth and perhaps even blood in the streets.

 

[EduardBernstein]

We explained to you that was during the Iraq invasion the international intervention was just...the American invasion of Iraq years later had no legitimacy. Capiche ?

What you did was post a bunch of shit, full more of partisan jabs and shit, than anything resembling a coherent point.


Are you incapable of doing more, or are you purposefully being a prick?

Dude I bet you cant even point where Iraq is...the whole entire world knows and recognize that the Iraq invasion was illegitimate and even the orange admitted that...and you are arguing with your own stupid unfounded stories.

1. You would lose that bet, asshole.

2. THe rest of the world, is too used to being able to take America for granted. No serious adult person could think that removing Saddam was illegitimate.

3. Not sure why you keep referencing Trump. Unless you are putting him forth as an Authority Figure who's wisdom should be deferred to?

Saddam was a bad Nazi. The United States still did war crimes in Iraq.
Haditha massacre - Wikipedia
Mahmudiyah rape and killings - Wikipedia

You don't have the credibility for me to click on a link. YOu have a point to make, make it, concisely as you can.


What is your point with that post? Just to smear America?

You are ignorant.

 

[pknopp]

Sorry you do not like my honest answer. I believe it is those who would lie this country into wars and those who support that is being un American.

Which regard to the issue of the "lie" you had a choice. YOu could believe that the leader of the United States lied, or you could believe that he, along with the intelligence agencies of the rest of the Free World, made an understandable mistake.

A 16 year and counting mistake? If you make a mistake, what do you do?

You choose to believe the worst of America.


That was your choice. ANd you seem to make that choice each and every time.


That is you being an anti-American. YOU.

We make more than our fair share of "mistakes". Being a "good American" does not mean you support the United States no matter what it does.

1. The mistake we were discussing was on WMDs. That is done. That you tried to conflate that with the invasion and occupation was dishonest of you. You used dishonesty because you know that your position is false.


2. My point was clear. You keep choosing the interpretation that puts the US in the worse or worst light. YOu disagree? Give me an example where you do the opposite, your best example.

We have heard the same warnings over and over concerning N. Korea. We have done nothing. No wasted billions, no dead American soldiers, no dead innocent civilians.

Different situation,

No it isn't.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Bailouts were a once in a great while thing, and let's not forget DumBama's involvement in that. Taking care of all these immigrants is an ongoing thing and a never ending expense that's been going on every year for decades. Apples and oranges.

Thank you from the Blame America First crowd. Now who's land did we destroy from south America?

How US policy in Honduras set the stage for today's migration

About the most leftist piece of garbage I've ever seen.

As I said, anything that doesn't fit your argument. If you want to argue that history is leftist, have at it.

That is correct, I mistakenly said leftist, when what I should have said is anti-American. They lay blame going back to the late 1800's on the United States, and even blamed the actions of the Clintons: both Bill and Hillary. They also placed blame on DumBama as well.

I enjoy watching someone like yourself defend Bill and Hillary. That's even more than I will do.

If that's what you think I"m doing, as long as it makes you feel better.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You could go on, but not very far I'm afraid. If you don't think Hollywood is liberal, it tells me your limited knowledge of politics in general.

Disney and the rest have done what they did to increase "shareholder value". That is not a liberal value. That is a Conservative welfare system.

Sure they did. However the Washington Examiner totally disagrees with you.

Disney’s push to force leftist politics onto kids

Says nothing about Shareholder value.

What it does say is they are pushing their leftist agenda against the approval of their consumers. How is that promoting shareholder values?

They seem to be doing pretty well. Their market isn't a middle aged truck driver.

Trump is a billionaire, and what are you?

Let me guess since you're a liberal: you are either retired early and very well off, independently wealthy, own your own business, or otherwise financially successful.

As for Disney's choices, CNN chooses the extreme left, and they are the worst rated cable television news station. Fox is number one. If their only goal was being at the top, wouldn't CNN be turning more conservative?

 

[pknopp]

Disney and the rest have done what they did to increase "shareholder value". That is not a liberal value. That is a Conservative welfare system.

Sure they did. However the Washington Examiner totally disagrees with you.

Disney’s push to force leftist politics onto kids

Says nothing about Shareholder value.

What it does say is they are pushing their leftist agenda against the approval of their consumers. How is that promoting shareholder values?

They seem to be doing pretty well. Their market isn't a middle aged truck driver.

Trump is a billionaire, and what are you?

Let me guess since you're a liberal: you are either retired early and very well off, independently wealthy, own your own business, or otherwise financially successful.

As for Disney's choices, CNN chooses the extreme left, and they are the worst rated cable television news station. Fox is number one. If their only goal was being at the top, wouldn't CNN be turning more conservative?

It must be sad seeing Boogeyman around every corner.

 

[Correll]

What you did was post a bunch of shit, full more of partisan jabs and shit, than anything resembling a coherent point.


Are you incapable of doing more, or are you purposefully being a prick?

Dude I bet you cant even point where Iraq is...the whole entire world knows and recognize that the Iraq invasion was illegitimate and even the orange admitted that...and you are arguing with your own stupid unfounded stories.

1. You would lose that bet, asshole.

2. THe rest of the world, is too used to being able to take America for granted. No serious adult person could think that removing Saddam was illegitimate.

3. Not sure why you keep referencing Trump. Unless you are putting him forth as an Authority Figure who's wisdom should be deferred to?

Saddam was a bad Nazi. The United States still did war crimes in Iraq.
Haditha massacre - Wikipedia
Mahmudiyah rape and killings - Wikipedia

You don't have the credibility for me to click on a link. YOu have a point to make, make it, concisely as you can.


What is your point with that post? Just to smear America?

There is no express immigration clause, right wingers. It is about being faithful to our express supreme law of the land.

Your heart belongs to Mexico. It is morally wrong of you to swear a false allegiance to America.

 

[Correll]

What you did was post a bunch of shit, full more of partisan jabs and shit, than anything resembling a coherent point.


Are you incapable of doing more, or are you purposefully being a prick?

Dude I bet you cant even point where Iraq is...the whole entire world knows and recognize that the Iraq invasion was illegitimate and even the orange admitted that...and you are arguing with your own stupid unfounded stories.

1. You would lose that bet, asshole.

2. THe rest of the world, is too used to being able to take America for granted. No serious adult person could think that removing Saddam was illegitimate.

3. Not sure why you keep referencing Trump. Unless you are putting him forth as an Authority Figure who's wisdom should be deferred to?

Saddam was a bad Nazi. The United States still did war crimes in Iraq.
Haditha massacre - Wikipedia
Mahmudiyah rape and killings - Wikipedia

You don't have the credibility for me to click on a link. YOu have a point to make, make it, concisely as you can.


What is your point with that post? Just to smear America?

You are ignorant.

Well, I dont' know everything, it is true. So, I guess I am "ignorant" of somethings.



I asked you a question as to what your point was. WHy are you afraid to say what your intentions were?


Are you that vile of a person, that you can't share your intentions even on an anonymous web site?

 

[Correll]

Which regard to the issue of the "lie" you had a choice. YOu could believe that the leader of the United States lied, or you could believe that he, along with the intelligence agencies of the rest of the Free World, made an understandable mistake.

A 16 year and counting mistake? If you make a mistake, what do you do?

You choose to believe the worst of America.


That was your choice. ANd you seem to make that choice each and every time.


That is you being an anti-American. YOU.

We make more than our fair share of "mistakes". Being a "good American" does not mean you support the United States no matter what it does.

1. The mistake we were discussing was on WMDs. That is done. That you tried to conflate that with the invasion and occupation was dishonest of you. You used dishonesty because you know that your position is false.


2. My point was clear. You keep choosing the interpretation that puts the US in the worse or worst light. YOu disagree? Give me an example where you do the opposite, your best example.

We have heard the same warnings over and over concerning N. Korea. We have done nothing. No wasted billions, no dead American soldiers, no dead innocent civilians.

Different situation,

No it isn't.

Oh, you don't consider the population of Seoul, millions of innocent people, to be a relevant factor?


I strongly disagree.


I would support no policy that would likely lead to that city being shelled by massed artillery.



And neither would the President of South Korea. ANY of them.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sure they did. However the Washington Examiner totally disagrees with you.

Disney’s push to force leftist politics onto kids

Says nothing about Shareholder value.

What it does say is they are pushing their leftist agenda against the approval of their consumers. How is that promoting shareholder values?

They seem to be doing pretty well. Their market isn't a middle aged truck driver.

Trump is a billionaire, and what are you?

Let me guess since you're a liberal: you are either retired early and very well off, independently wealthy, own your own business, or otherwise financially successful.

As for Disney's choices, CNN chooses the extreme left, and they are the worst rated cable television news station. Fox is number one. If their only goal was being at the top, wouldn't CNN be turning more conservative?

It must be sad seeing Boogeyman around every corner.

Not when they are actually there.

 

[Issa]

She is oppressed because she wears a hijab and you are the first to attack k and insult her ? Lol you want her half naked to prove that she is not oppressed ? She represents her area and she was elected by Americans....you can go and run against her and try and defeat her democratically.

Why doesn't she remove that symbol of oppression then?

Who said she is oppressed ?

 

[Issa]

She meant AIPAC and money...one has to make a clear difference between criticizing lobbies that back Israel and anti semitism.
Example I dont like the regime in Saudi Arabia that doesnt make me islamophobe.

Ilan Omar is a ******* Muslim who wears a hijab a symbol of Muslim oppression of females and theocratic rule which is directly opposed to our Constitution. She refuses to remove that rag. Her comrades are traitors and should be prosecuted as such along with her. You are out of your mind if you think for one minute any one of these cult-religion bitches care about America.

She is oppressed because she wears a hijab and you are the first to attack k and insult her ? Lol you want her half naked to prove that she is not oppressed ? She represents her area and she was elected by Americans....you can go and run against her and try and defeat her democratically.

How about if she dresses like an American? Nah, can't have that. She's in America now unfortunately.

Dress like an American? Like a Navajo, Apache, Amish, catholic nun, or like what exactly?

 

[Issa]

From an imperialistic way ? Of course....war Iraq invasion was an imperialistic unilateral move by the US....not even crazy little orange baby agreed with it although he flip flopped on that like always.

I posted photographic evidence to back up my claim, and all you did was restate your claim.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP LEFTARD.

We explained to you that was during the Iraq invasion the international intervention was just...the American invasion of Iraq years later had no legitimacy. Capiche ?

What you did was post a bunch of shit, full more of partisan jabs and shit, than anything resembling a coherent point.


Are you incapable of doing more, or are you purposefully being a prick?

Dude I bet you cant even point where Iraq is...the whole entire world knows and recognize that the Iraq invasion was illegitimate and even the orange admitted that...and you are arguing with your own stupid unfounded stories.

1. You would lose that bet, asshole.

2. THe rest of the world, is too used to being able to take America for granted. No serious adult person could think that removing Saddam was illegitimate.

3. Not sure why you keep referencing Trump. Unless you are putting him forth as an Authority Figure who's wisdom should be deferred to?

You trolling now I have no time for your childish claims and hallucinations.

 

[Leo123]

Dress like an American? Like a Navajo, Apache, Amish, catholic nun, or like what exactly?

None of those groups include patriarchal-rule of women to dress a certain way. In fact, some Muslim women have been punished for taking them off.

Iranian woman gets 20-year punishment for publicly taking off hijab

"Iranian woman gets 20-year punishment for publicly taking off hijab

Since December 2017, more than 30 Iranian women have been arrested by authorities for removing their veils in public."

"Women, who appear in public places and roads without wearing an Islamic hijab shall be sentenced to ten days to two months imprisonment or a fine of 50 thousand to five hundred rials," states Article 638 of Iran's Islamic Penal Code."

Wouldn't it be a great gesture on the part of Omar to stand in Congress an remove her hijab and declare solidarity with her Iranian 'sisters?' Why doesn't she do this? Until she takes off that symbol of religious oppression of people and especially women I do not consider her part of America. Nor do a lot of people. Next election cycle she'll crash and burn if she doesn't change.

 

[Leo123]

You trolling now I have no time for your childish claims and hallucinations.

You be trollin' too Bud. It's a TROLL party....!!! WHEEEEEE

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Dress like an American? Like a Navajo, Apache, Amish, catholic nun, or like what exactly?

None of those groups include patriarchal-rule of women to dress a certain way. In fact, some Muslim women have been punished for taking them off.

Iranian woman gets 20-year punishment for publicly taking off hijab

"Iranian woman gets 20-year punishment for publicly taking off hijab

Since December 2017, more than 30 Iranian women have been arrested by authorities for removing their veils in public."

"Women, who appear in public places and roads without wearing an Islamic hijab shall be sentenced to ten days to two months imprisonment or a fine of 50 thousand to five hundred rials," states Article 638 of Iran's Islamic Penal Code."

Wouldn't it be a great gesture on the part of Omar to stand in Congress an remove her hijab and declare solidarity with her Iranian 'sisters?' Why doesn't she do this? Until she takes off that symbol of religious oppression of people and especially women I do not consider her part of America. Nor do a lot of people. Next election cycle she'll crash and burn if she doesn't change.

I guess he's been in this country for such a short time he can't figure out what American women dress like.