Trump Challenges Equal Endowment Of Birthright Citizenship For Children Of Illegal Migrants

[danielpalos]

There is no such "rule of thumb." Don't try to make shit up and expect everyone to buy it.

Buy this, dumbass, the author of the phrase, "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan, made it abundantly clear during Senate debates that it does not apply to alien children:

It excludes not only Indians but persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, [or] who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers.

Likewise, Howard’s co-author, Sen. Lyman Trumball of Illinois, said that the phrase meant complete jurisdiction:

not owing allegiance to anybody else.

Allegiance. French a-legiance, homage. Latin ad-ligare, to tie, bind. The tie, or ligamen, which binds the subject to the king in return for that protection which the king affords the subject.

The militia of the State consists of all able-bodied male citizens and all other able-bodied males who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, who are between the ages of eighteen and forty-five, and who are residents of the State, and of such other persons as may upon their own application be enlisted or commissioned therein pursuant to the provisions of this division, subject, however, to such exemptions as now exist or may be hereafter created by the laws of the United States or of this State.

 

[Street Juice]

trump cannot unilaterally change the Constitution.

The Constitution does not need to be changed. You people are really something with the false stories. Birthright citizenship is nothing more than a custom. Trump could, indeed, bring us up to the standard of almost every other country in the world.

Not mere custom after 1808. Anyone born in the US is naturally born a US citizen.

So the birth tourism industry advertises openly in China. It arranges tourist visas for expectant mothers to coincide with their delivery due dates. The pregnant "tourist" flies into LAX, is met at the gate by their Chinese-"American" hosts, and, with the other pregnant Chinese tourists just arrived, are driven straight to the birthing shed, where they will be attended by Chinese doctors and Chinese nurses and Chinese document filler-outers to get the social security numbers, American birth certificates, and so on. After the new mother delivers her American, she gets in the airport van and takes our fellow citizen and their valuable citizenship back back to China with her, where a whole other industry is ready to help her and her American tap into the US welfare and benefits system from inside China.

Hey, it's an American, right?

No sane person countenances that. No one but the most ignorant or dishonest would pretend that's what our forebears meant by "citizenship".

 

[Street Juice]

umbrella phrase “all persons born or naturalized in the United States.”

"...and subject to the jurisdiction thereof..."

There is a difference between "subject to the jurisdiction" and "within the jurisdiction". The rule of thumb is, if there is an authority that can draft you into war, you are subject to that authority. If a war were to break out while a Thai tourist were here seeing the sights, the US could not draft him into the army, hand him a rifle and a bus ticket to Winnipeg and send him off. Therefore, the Thai tourist isn't subject to the US, and if he has a kid while sight-seeing, the kid is Thai and goes home with its parents.

Same for illegals.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

So, if a flight from Finland to Mexico City stops to refuel in New York while we are fighting another war for Israel, the feds can come on the plane and legally impress the younger male Mexicans and younger male Finns on the flight into the military? Is that what you are trying to argue?

 

[danielpalos]

trump cannot unilaterally change the Constitution.

The Constitution does not need to be changed. You people are really something with the false stories. Birthright citizenship is nothing more than a custom. Trump could, indeed, bring us up to the standard of almost every other country in the world.

Not mere custom after 1808. Anyone born in the US is naturally born a US citizen.

So the birth tourism industry advertises openly in China. It arranges tourist visas for expectant mothers to coincide with their delivery due dates. The pregnant "tourist" flies into LAX, is met at the gate by their Chinese-"American" hosts, and, with the other pregnant Chinese tourists just arrived, are driven straight to the birthing shed, where they will be attended by Chinese doctors and Chinese nurses and Chinese document filler-outers to get the social security numbers, American birth certificates, and so on. After the new mother delivers her American, she gets in the airport van and takes our fellow citizen and their valuable citizenship back back to China with her, where a whole other industry is ready to help her and her American tap into the US welfare and benefits system from inside China.

Hey, it's an American, right?

No sane person countenances that. No one but the most ignorant or dishonest would pretend that's what our forebears meant by "citizenship".

It isn't about birth tourism but about promoting the general welfare. Commerce is supposed to improve the standard of living of the market participants involved. We should probably invest more in those foreign economies to help them keep their citizens there.

 

[danielpalos]

umbrella phrase “all persons born or naturalized in the United States.”

"...and subject to the jurisdiction thereof..."

There is a difference between "subject to the jurisdiction" and "within the jurisdiction". The rule of thumb is, if there is an authority that can draft you into war, you are subject to that authority. If a war were to break out while a Thai tourist were here seeing the sights, the US could not draft him into the army, hand him a rifle and a bus ticket to Winnipeg and send him off. Therefore, the Thai tourist isn't subject to the US, and if he has a kid while sight-seeing, the kid is Thai and goes home with its parents.

Same for illegals.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

So, if a flight from Finland to Mexico City stops to refuel in New York while we are fighting another war for Israel, the feds can come on the plane and legally impress the younger male Mexicans and younger male Finns on the flight into the military? Is that what you are trying to argue?

Not if they don't get off the plane or the boat.

 

[Street Juice]

Not if they don't get off the plane or the boat.

So if a Finn has a medical emergency and is taken to a hospital near JFK, he's fair game? He becomes an American citizen in the ambulance and the military can draft him? That's what you are literally arguing.

 

[Unkotare]

Not if they don't get off the plane or the boat.

So if a Finn has a medical emergency and is taken to a hospital near JFK, he's fair game? He becomes an American citizen in the ambulance and the military can draft him? That's what you are literally arguing.

False premise X 2.

 

[danielpalos]

Not if they don't get off the plane or the boat.

So if a Finn has a medical emergency and is taken to a hospital near JFK, he's fair game? He becomes an American citizen in the ambulance and the military can draft him? That's what you are literally arguing.

They would probably wait until fit for service; he could have left the country by then. Any more special pleading?

 

[Street Juice]

trump cannot unilaterally change the Constitution.

The Constitution does not need to be changed. You people are really something with the false stories. Birthright citizenship is nothing more than a custom. Trump could, indeed, bring us up to the standard of almost every other country in the world.

Not mere custom after 1808. Anyone born in the US is naturally born a US citizen.

So the birth tourism industry advertises openly in China. It arranges tourist visas for expectant mothers to coincide with their delivery due dates. The pregnant "tourist" flies into LAX, is met at the gate by their Chinese-"American" hosts, and, with the other pregnant Chinese tourists just arrived, are driven straight to the birthing shed, where they will be attended by Chinese doctors and Chinese nurses and Chinese document filler-outers to get the social security numbers, American birth certificates, and so on. After the new mother delivers her American, she gets in the airport van and takes our fellow citizen and their valuable citizenship back back to China with her, where a whole other industry is ready to help her and her American tap into the US welfare and benefits system from inside China.

Hey, it's an American, right?

No sane person countenances that. No one but the most ignorant or dishonest would pretend that's what our forebears meant by "citizenship".

It isn't about birth tourism but about promoting the general welfare. Commerce is supposed to improve the standard of living of the market participants involved. We should probably invest more in those foreign economies to help them keep their citizens there.

You are rather dim, it seems.

Who do you mean when you say "we" should invest more? The US govt? Apple? Walmart? You and me?

You see the US gov't like buying shares in Chinese companies or something? Taxing Americans to make rich Chinese richer?

And how is making rich Chinese richer going to keep poor Chinese in China?

And where did you come up with commerce all of the sudden? We were talking about birthright citizenship

 

[Street Juice]

Not if they don't get off the plane or the boat.

So if a Finn has a medical emergency and is taken to a hospital near JFK, he's fair game? He becomes an American citizen in the ambulance and the military can draft him? That's what you are literally arguing.

False premise X 2.

No, Twink, that's what you and Palos are exactly arguing, that if you are simply within the United States you are subject to US jurisdiction

 

[Unkotare]

... if you are simply within the United States you are subject to US jurisdiction

You ARE, dumbass.

 

[Unkotare]

...Do not speak the language ...

You don't know that.

 

[Unkotare]

... carrying state food card , ...

That does not indicate citizenship.

 

[Unkotare]

... dragging children around ...

US citizens don't have children?

 

[danielpalos]

trump cannot unilaterally change the Constitution.

The Constitution does not need to be changed. You people are really something with the false stories. Birthright citizenship is nothing more than a custom. Trump could, indeed, bring us up to the standard of almost every other country in the world.

Not mere custom after 1808. Anyone born in the US is naturally born a US citizen.

So the birth tourism industry advertises openly in China. It arranges tourist visas for expectant mothers to coincide with their delivery due dates. The pregnant "tourist" flies into LAX, is met at the gate by their Chinese-"American" hosts, and, with the other pregnant Chinese tourists just arrived, are driven straight to the birthing shed, where they will be attended by Chinese doctors and Chinese nurses and Chinese document filler-outers to get the social security numbers, American birth certificates, and so on. After the new mother delivers her American, she gets in the airport van and takes our fellow citizen and their valuable citizenship back back to China with her, where a whole other industry is ready to help her and her American tap into the US welfare and benefits system from inside China.

Hey, it's an American, right?

No sane person countenances that. No one but the most ignorant or dishonest would pretend that's what our forebears meant by "citizenship".

It isn't about birth tourism but about promoting the general welfare. Commerce is supposed to improve the standard of living of the market participants involved. We should probably invest more in those foreign economies to help them keep their citizens there.

You are rather dim, it seems.

Who do you mean when you say "we" should invest more? The US govt? Apple? Walmart? You and me?

You see the US gov't like buying shares in Chinese companies or something? Taxing Americans to make rich Chinese richer?

And how is making rich Chinese richer going to keep poor Chinese in China?

And where did you come up with commerce all of the sudden? We were talking about birthright citizenship

You are even dimmer. Investing in foreign economies so their people want to stay there is what I am referring to. Only the cognitively dissonant right wing wants to wage general warfare with our general welfare clause and then complain about refugees.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Off On A Tangent From Illegal Migrant Policy By A Stray People Hoarder "

* Incapable Of Philanthropic Support Or Idealogical Prevalence And Demands Theft Of Citizens By Government *

You are even dimmer. Investing in foreign economies so their people want to stay there is what I am referring to. Only the cognitively dissonant right wing wants to wage general warfare with our general welfare clause and then complain about refugees.

No one is illegal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

No one is illegal is a loosely connected international network of anti-statism groups and religious asylum initiatives that represents non-resident immigrants who stay in a country illegally and are at risk of deportation. The network has started a campaign and held rallies to bring wider attention to the situation of refugees. The campaign initially began in Germany as No Person Is Illegal (German: Kein Mensch ist illegal or kmii) and has spread to other countries, including Canada.

 

[danielpalos]

" Off On A Tangent From Illegal Migrant Policy By A Stray People Hoarder "

* Incapable Of Philanthropic Support Or Idealogical Prevalence And Demands Theft Of Citizens By Government *

You are even dimmer. Investing in foreign economies so their people want to stay there is what I am referring to. Only the cognitively dissonant right wing wants to wage general warfare with our general welfare clause and then complain about refugees.

No one is illegal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

No one is illegal is a loosely connected international network of anti-statism groups and religious asylum initiatives that represents non-resident immigrants who stay in a country illegally and are at risk of deportation. The network has started a campaign and held rallies to bring wider attention to the situation of refugees. The campaign initially began in Germany as No Person Is Illegal (German: Kein Mensch ist illegal or kmii) and has spread to other countries, including Canada.

In our US case, we have a valid point. There is no express Immigration clause in our federal Constitution to be illegal to.

And, there is no appeal to ignorance of the laws; only illegals do that. See our dilemma?

 

[Unkotare]

...Do not speak the language ...

You don't know that.

 

[laferia52]

" Trump Challenges Equal Endowment Of Birthright Citizenship For Children Of Illegal Migrants "

President Trump may sign executive order ending birthright citizenship

On Friday, various sources told The Hill that members of the Trump Administration have been discussing the issue with increasing frequency.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Under current law, all babies born in United States are automatically granted citizenship, regardless of whether or not their parents are American. An executive order signed by President Trump would likely put an end to such legal protections.
...
However, the courts have not definitively ruled on the issue.
...
Critics of birthright citizenship oppose the fact that illegal immigrants and visitors to the United States can give birth to children who automatically have American citizenship rights.

When you have all these pregnant women about to give birth show up at US border trying to enter the USA so their babies can become US citizens, yes agree in these cases they should be denied US citizenship.

 

[danielpalos]

" Trump Challenges Equal Endowment Of Birthright Citizenship For Children Of Illegal Migrants "

President Trump may sign executive order ending birthright citizenship

On Friday, various sources told The Hill that members of the Trump Administration have been discussing the issue with increasing frequency.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Under current law, all babies born in United States are automatically granted citizenship, regardless of whether or not their parents are American. An executive order signed by President Trump would likely put an end to such legal protections.
...
However, the courts have not definitively ruled on the issue.
...
Critics of birthright citizenship oppose the fact that illegal immigrants and visitors to the United States can give birth to children who automatically have American citizenship rights.

When you have all these pregnant women about to give birth show up at US border trying to enter the USA so their babies can become US citizens, yes agree in these cases they should be denied US citizenship.

by denying due process of law? only the right wing believes in sacrificing the end to the means.