Trump: 14th Amendment is Unconstitutional

[JoeMoma]

An injunction will be applied for and granted immediately following any attempt by Trump to **** with the constitution.

TRANSLATION: Uh-oh, he was right. We really CAN'T stop him except by fighting our way through the courts.

Just like Obama's EO for temporary legal status of millions of illegal immigrants

 

[candycorn]

An injunction will be applied for and granted immediately following any attempt by Trump to **** with the constitution.

TRANSLATION: Uh-oh, he was right. We really CAN'T stop him except by fighting our way through the courts.

Wow, you're incredibly stupid.

I could sue you for harrassment right now. If a guy bumps into you on the street, you can sue him for assault. I know a guy who was chased down by the cops because he made a gesture to a woman from his car after she allegedly cut him off. He had to take anger management courses.

Sure the President could try to do whatever he wants. No court in the nation would stand by and let it go though.

A the injunction stays in place and nothing gets done, it would be those wanting to trash our constitution that would have to make their case.

As much incredible idiot-speak hysteria you and you're Confederates have spewed over the last 6 years of Obama's Presidency, you more than anyone else should be acutely aware that the President could not get away trashing the Constitution in a way you're prescribing... Otherwise, wouldn't you think (always a dangerous thing for you, I know but please try to wrap your pea brain around it), that Obama would have banned a whole bunch of weapons by now; if that is all it took; for him to simply say he interpets the 2nd amendment differently?

I swear, you guys are turning up the crazy to levels I didn't even know you could reach. In some ways, I'm intrigued. Seriously, I thought it would really take something special to make you into the puppet race you've become. As a science project, you guys are helpless to think for yourself.

 

[Wyatt earp]

An injunction will be applied for and granted immediately following any attempt by Trump to **** with the constitution.

TRANSLATION: Uh-oh, he was right. We really CAN'T stop him except by fighting our way through the courts.

Wow, you're incredibly stupid.

I could sue you for harrassment right now. If a guy bumps into you on the street, you can sue him for assault. I know a guy who was chased down by the cops because he made a gesture to a woman from his car after she allegedly cut him off. He had to take anger management courses.

Sure the President could try to do whatever he wants. No court in the nation would stand by and let it go though.

A the injunction stays in place and nothing gets done, it would be those wanting to trash our constitution that would have to make their case.

As much incredible idiot-speak hysteria you and you're Confederates have spewed over the last 6 years of Obama's Presidency, you more than anyone else should be acutely aware that the President could not get away trashing the Constitution in a way you're prescribing... Otherwise, wouldn't you think (always a dangerous thing for you, I know but please try to wrap your pea brain around it), that Obama would have banned a whole bunch of weapons by now; if that is all it took; for him to simply say he interpets the 2nd amendment differently?

I swear, you guys are turning up the crazy to levels I didn't even know you could reach. In some ways, I'm intrigued. Seriously, I thought it would really take something special to make you into the puppet race you've become. As a science project, you guys are helpless to think for yourself.

Was Harry Reid interpreting it wrong in 1993?
“If making it easy to be an illegal alien isn’t enough, how about offering a reward for being an illegal immigrant? No sane country would do that, right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child, we reward that child with US citizenship and guarantee a full access to all public and social services this society provides, and that’s a lot of services. Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?”




No, these are not recent comments from Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Steve King (R-IA) or even Donald Trump. These were the words of Harry Reid in 1993 when he introduced an immigration enforcement bill, which, among other things, reaffirmed the original and proper reading of the 14th Amendment and qualified the birthright citizenship clause to exclude those born here from illegal alien parents

- See more at: Conservative Review - Fixing the Birthright Citizenship Loophole: Myth vs Fact

 

[candycorn]

An injunction will be applied for and granted immediately following any attempt by Trump to **** with the constitution.

TRANSLATION: Uh-oh, he was right. We really CAN'T stop him except by fighting our way through the courts.

Wow, you're incredibly stupid.

I could sue you for harrassment right now. If a guy bumps into you on the street, you can sue him for assault. I know a guy who was chased down by the cops because he made a gesture to a woman from his car after she allegedly cut him off. He had to take anger management courses.

Sure the President could try to do whatever he wants. No court in the nation would stand by and let it go though.

A the injunction stays in place and nothing gets done, it would be those wanting to trash our constitution that would have to make their case.

As much incredible idiot-speak hysteria you and you're Confederates have spewed over the last 6 years of Obama's Presidency, you more than anyone else should be acutely aware that the President could not get away trashing the Constitution in a way you're prescribing... Otherwise, wouldn't you think (always a dangerous thing for you, I know but please try to wrap your pea brain around it), that Obama would have banned a whole bunch of weapons by now; if that is all it took; for him to simply say he interpets the 2nd amendment differently?

I swear, you guys are turning up the crazy to levels I didn't even know you could reach. In some ways, I'm intrigued. Seriously, I thought it would really take something special to make you into the puppet race you've become. As a science project, you guys are helpless to think for yourself.

Was Harry Reid interpreting it wrong in 1993?
“If making it easy to be an illegal alien isn’t enough, how about offering a reward for being an illegal immigrant? No sane country would do that, right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child, we reward that child with US citizenship and guarantee a full access to all public and social services this society provides, and that’s a lot of services. Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?”




No, these are not recent comments from Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Steve King (R-IA) or even Donald Trump. These were the words of Harry Reid in 1993 when he introduced an immigration enforcement bill, which, among other things, reaffirmed the original and proper reading of the 14th Amendment and qualified the birthright citizenship clause to exclude those born here from illegal alien parents

- See more at: Conservative Review - Fixing the Birthright Citizenship Loophole: Myth vs Fact

I don't see where Harry Reid is interpeting the 14th amendment (he doesn't mention it).

 

[Wyatt earp]

An injunction will be applied for and granted immediately following any attempt by Trump to **** with the constitution.

TRANSLATION: Uh-oh, he was right. We really CAN'T stop him except by fighting our way through the courts.

Wow, you're incredibly stupid.

I could sue you for harrassment right now. If a guy bumps into you on the street, you can sue him for assault. I know a guy who was chased down by the cops because he made a gesture to a woman from his car after she allegedly cut him off. He had to take anger management courses.

Sure the President could try to do whatever he wants. No court in the nation would stand by and let it go though.

A the injunction stays in place and nothing gets done, it would be those wanting to trash our constitution that would have to make their case.

As much incredible idiot-speak hysteria you and you're Confederates have spewed over the last 6 years of Obama's Presidency, you more than anyone else should be acutely aware that the President could not get away trashing the Constitution in a way you're prescribing... Otherwise, wouldn't you think (always a dangerous thing for you, I know but please try to wrap your pea brain around it), that Obama would have banned a whole bunch of weapons by now; if that is all it took; for him to simply say he interpets the 2nd amendment differently?

I swear, you guys are turning up the crazy to levels I didn't even know you could reach. In some ways, I'm intrigued. Seriously, I thought it would really take something special to make you into the puppet race you've become. As a science project, you guys are helpless to think for yourself.

Was Harry Reid interpreting it wrong in 1993?
“If making it easy to be an illegal alien isn’t enough, how about offering a reward for being an illegal immigrant? No sane country would do that, right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child, we reward that child with US citizenship and guarantee a full access to all public and social services this society provides, and that’s a lot of services. Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?”




No, these are not recent comments from Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Steve King (R-IA) or even Donald Trump. These were the words of Harry Reid in 1993 when he introduced an immigration enforcement bill, which, among other things, reaffirmed the original and proper reading of the 14th Amendment and qualified the birthright citizenship clause to exclude those born here from illegal alien parents

- See more at: Conservative Review - Fixing the Birthright Citizenship Loophole: Myth vs Fact

I don't see where Harry Reid is interpeting the 14th amendment (he doesn't mention it).

Harry's anchor baby bill 1993

TITLE X—CITIZENSHIP 4 SEC. 1001. BASIS OF CITIZENSHIP CLARIFIED. In the exercise of its powers under section of the Fourteenth Article of Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the Congress has determined and hereby declares that any person born after the date of enactment of this title to a mother who is neither a citizen of the United States nor admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident, and which person is a national or citizen of another country of which either of his or her natural parents is a national or citizen, or is entitled upon application to become a national or citizen of such country, shall be considered as born subject to the jurisdiction of that foreign country and not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States within the meaning of section 1 of such Article and shall therefore not be a citizen of the United States or of any State solely by reason of physical presence within the United States at the moment of birth

 

[airplanemechanic]

Liberals are hilaroius. They take what they read in the OP as gospel and don't do a shred of their own investigation. Trump never said repeal the 14th, morons.

 

[SwimExpert]

Which is just as ignorant, stupid, and wrong as saying the 14th Amendment is 'un-Constitutional,'

What a load of horse shit! May as well accuse you liberals of claiming that the 2nd amendment is unconstitutional, since you claim that it doesn't cover an individual's right to keep and bear arms outside of military service.

and given the fact there's no such thing as an 'anchor baby.'

Someone must have been handing out free samples of Raisin Bran at the Kentucky Derby, because the horse shit is really pouring in.

 

[SwimExpert]

Yeah I couldnt make this up if I tried.

Except that it is made up. Trump said that birthright citizenship for anchor babies is not constitutionally mandated. He never said that the 14th amendment is unconstitutional.

Nah he JUST argued SOME attorneys say it's not/ LOVE how he argues for attorneys! HINT: He said it WOULD be found unconstitutional in court, even though it never has! THAT'S not taking a position on it right? *shaking head*

Congratulations, you're as stupid as Rabbi. Nowhere does Trump say anything about the 14th amendment being unconstitutional. He says that birthright citizenship by anchor babies is not guaranteed by the constitution. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

Yep, after all, he doesn't have enough to do but argue the point of view of "lawyers" who believe those babies aren't citizens right? Not that HE believes it? lol

Of course the correct interpretation IS from SCOTUS ruling saying IF you are born on US soil (few exceptions) YOU ARE A US CITIZEN!

Yeah, and? Nobody ever claimed that he doesn't agree with the point. But that has nothing to do with this bullshit claim that Trump called the 14th amendment unconstitutional.

 

[Syriusly]

I cannot tell how this even more makes me want Trump to be the face of the Republican Party

Hey boy.....this country was founded for White people only. Read the 1790 Naturalization Act boy. Read it boy. Publish it boy. One more time......this country was founded for White people.

Good Boy, The GOP's base speaks up. Keep it up Bubba

This representative of the GOP base speaks the truth.......boy!

You are representative of the White Power Racist faction of the GOP base- and a big Trump supporter.

I can't help but enjoy pointing out how much Trump enchants racists.

 

[Syriusly]

BTW can you cite a case where the supreme court has granted citizenship to the children of criminal aliens?

The Supreme Court doesn't 'grant' citizenship to anyone.

However the Supreme Court has recognized that a child born to illegal alien parents in the United States is a citizen because he/she was born in the United States.


INS v. Rios-Pineda 471 U.S. 444 (1985)

By that time, respondent wife had given birth to a child, who, born in the United States, was a citizen of this country. A deportation hearing was held in December, 1978. Respondents conceded illegal entry, conceded deportability,

I don't think citizenship was an issue. The Court merely assumed. And, I believe our statutory immigration laws specify birthright citizenship.

Frankly, I doubt the supreme court would want to touch this issue with a ten foot pole. But, it might be that a Roberts court would just defer to the legislature, which is what he did with Obamacare and criticized 5 other justices for not doing in the gay marriage case.

Immigration law does not specify birthright citizenship for illegals.

I

Good thing SCOTUS said the 14th did then right?

SCOTUS has never ruled on the citizenship of illegals.

Illegal aliens are not U.S. citizens.

Children born in the United States are citizens- so of course the court has not ruled on the citizenship of illegals.

 

[Syriusly]

Yeah I couldnt make this up if I tried.

Except that it is made up. Trump said that birthright citizenship for anchor babies is not constitutionally mandated. He never said that the 14th amendment is unconstitutional.

Nah he JUST argued SOME attorneys say it's not/ LOVE how he argues for attorneys! HINT: He said it WOULD be found unconstitutional in court, even though it never has! THAT'S not taking a position on it right? *shaking head*

Congratulations, you're as stupid as Rabbi. Nowhere does Trump say anything about the 14th amendment being unconstitutional. He says that birthright citizenship by anchor babies is not guaranteed by the constitution. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

Yep, after all, he doesn't have enough to do but argue the point of view of "lawyers" who believe those babies aren't citizens right? Not that HE believes it? lol

Of course the correct interpretation IS from SCOTUS ruling saying IF you are born on US soil (few exceptions) YOU ARE A US CITIZEN!

Yeah, and? Nobody ever claimed that he doesn't agree with the point. But that has nothing to do with this bullshit claim that Trump called the 14th amendment unconstitutional.

The funny part is- his supporters want him to have said that- and his detractors want him to have said that.

But you are right- he didn't.

 

[Little-Acorn]

An injunction will be applied for and granted immediately following any attempt by Trump to **** with the constitution.

TRANSLATION: Uh-oh, he was right. We really CAN'T stop him except by fighting our way through the courts.

Wow, you're incredibly stupid.

As usual, all the liberals can do is call names and smear people when they lose the argument.

that Obama would have banned a whole bunch of weapons by now; if that is all it took; for him to simply say he interpets the 2nd amendment differently?

By pretending the 2nd amendment applies only to militia members when it doesn't, or applies to "military-style" weapons when it doesn't do that either?

That's exactly what liberals, up to and including Obama, HAVE been doing since 1939. And the Courts have done nothing except for an occasional case decades after the "re-interpretation". Thanks for providing the example.

Now it's President Trump's turn.

(more of the usual insults and smears, deleted for lack of content)

Well, one of us is turning up the fabrications to "crazy levels". But I have pointed out the truth of what I said at every step.

Who does that leave?

 

[Little-Acorn]

Which is just as ignorant, stupid, and wrong as saying the 14th Amendment is 'un-Constitutional,' and given the fact there's no such thing as an 'anchor baby.'

Yet another whiner who has completely missed (or is carefully ignoring) all the posts in this thread that point out that Trump never said the 14th amendment is unconstitutional.

And the OP still has not corrected his lie in the title of the thread.

Liberals cannot exist without lying about what Republicans have done.

If they couldn't lie, they would have nothing to say at all.

Gee, that would be terrible, wouldn't it.

 

[Dad2three]

BTW can you cite a case where the supreme court has granted citizenship to the children of criminal aliens?

The Supreme Court doesn't 'grant' citizenship to anyone.

However the Supreme Court has recognized that a child born to illegal alien parents in the United States is a citizen because he/she was born in the United States.


INS v. Rios-Pineda 471 U.S. 444 (1985)

By that time, respondent wife had given birth to a child, who, born in the United States, was a citizen of this country. A deportation hearing was held in December, 1978. Respondents conceded illegal entry, conceded deportability,

I don't think citizenship was an issue. The Court merely assumed. And, I believe our statutory immigration laws specify birthright citizenship.

Frankly, I doubt the supreme court would want to touch this issue with a ten foot pole. But, it might be that a Roberts court would just defer to the legislature, which is what he did with Obamacare and criticized 5 other justices for not doing in the gay marriage case.

Immigration law does not specify birthright citizenship for illegals.

Good thing SCOTUS said the 14th did then right?

SCOTUS has never ruled on the citizenship of illegals.

Yet they say those that were born in the US, even children of non citizens, are automatically US citizens. Go figure

 

[Little-Acorn]

this bullshit claim that Trump called the 14th amendment unconstitutional.

The funny part is- his supporters want him to have said that-

Name one. (yawn)

 

[Dad2three]

Yeah I couldnt make this up if I tried.

Except that it is made up. Trump said that birthright citizenship for anchor babies is not constitutionally mandated. He never said that the 14th amendment is unconstitutional.

Nah he JUST argued SOME attorneys say it's not/ LOVE how he argues for attorneys! HINT: He said it WOULD be found unconstitutional in court, even though it never has! THAT'S not taking a position on it right? *shaking head*

Congratulations, you're as stupid as Rabbi. Nowhere does Trump say anything about the 14th amendment being unconstitutional. He says that birthright citizenship by anchor babies is not guaranteed by the constitution. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

Yep, after all, he doesn't have enough to do but argue the point of view of "lawyers" who believe those babies aren't citizens right? Not that HE believes it? lol

Of course the correct interpretation IS from SCOTUS ruling saying IF you are born on US soil (few exceptions) YOU ARE A US CITIZEN!

Yeah, and? Nobody ever claimed that he doesn't agree with the point. But that has nothing to do with this bullshit claim that Trump called the 14th amendment unconstitutional.

Oh right, he DOES agree (his posit IS that he agrees the 14th DOESN'T grant citizenship to kids of illegal aliens). Whether HE said it or not, he stands by the POSITION!

 

[Unkotare]

Whether he stands by the position is irrelevant. The Supreme Court stands somewhere else.

 

[danielpalos]

a rich guy trying to make up some rules with his gold; what a surprise from the Capital right.

why not present a business plan in Commerce (well regulated) that will earn multibillion dollar bonuses for the (other) People, my good Capital sir.

or,

is it too difficult to be a good socialist and earn a profit for the (other) People (with the other Peoples' money), even with recourse to a Commerce Clause and an official Mint to work with?

 

[Little-Acorn]

a rich guy trying to make up some rules with his gold; what a surprise from the Capital right.

TRANSLATION: I can't refute what Trump says either.

 

[danielpalos]

a rich guy trying to make up some rules with his gold; what a surprise from the Capital right.

TRANSLATION: I can't refute what Trump says either.

nope; just a shilling's worth of propaganda and rhetoric.

why not present a business plan in Commerce (well regulated) that will earn multibillion dollar bonuses for the (other) People, my good Capital sir.

or,

is it too difficult to be a good socialist and earn a profit for the (other) People (with the other Peoples' money), even with recourse to a Commerce Clause and an official Mint to work with?