Trump Is Going To Lose Most Of The Current Federal Court Cases....Then What?

[SeaMajor7]

The 14th wasn't meant for Illegal Aliens, plain and simple.
This must be codified by the SCOTUS.
Roe your boats.

 

[Dr. Phosphorous]

It was that bad. Typical Democrat boondoggle costing taxpayers tons of money and Fraud and Abuse, kind of like what they're finding now that we are able to look. November 5th was a reperendum on turning away from your dishonesty, thank God.

I suppose you have proof of that. You're flailing now, didn't take long LOL

It's well known that gun sellers in the U.S. have provided AR-15s and other deadly weapons to the Mexican cartels. You're just not informed, because you get all your bullshit news from right wing sources. The President of Mexico recently complained about this when Trump was threatening his stupid tariffs.

It's pretty ridiculous and hypocritical of Trump to complain about fetanyl and other deadly drugs....while not saying a fucking word about AR-15s being smuggled across the border to the Mexican drug cartels.

 

[Blisterfinger]

It's well known that gun sellers in the U.S. have provided AR-15s and other deadly weapons to the Mexican cartels. You're just not informed, because you get all your bullshit news from right wing sources. The President of Mexico recently complained about this when Trump was threatening his stupid tariffs.

It's pretty ridiculous and hypocritical of Trump to complain about fetanyl and other deadly drugs....while not saying a fucking word about AR-15s being smuggled across the border to the Mexican drug cartels.

So are they smuggled or supplied? Why don't you make up your mind? Still waiting for evidence that we have provided AR-15s to Mexican cartels. You really are just full of shit, typical Democrat. You going to start singing now LOL

 

[Slade3200]

I read it many times. Fuck the link. I read the case. And details make a difference.

In any event, it doesn’t matter. The whole point of the debate is to address what was actually intended. The Congressmen I previously quoted spoke to the issue directly.

You won’t even discuss that.

The congressman, like you, is making up an interpretation that is not supported by the actual language of the amendment.

I’ll go back to the line that YOU pointed out. Subject tot he jurisdiction if. What do you think the definition of jurisdiction is?

 

[Dr. Phosphorous]

That is what the Amendment says. So far, so good.

But what was MEANT by “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” as used in the Amendment? See? That’s the actual question.

This is referring to children born of diplomats and other foreign representatives in the U.S., Kleetus.

For example, if a baby is born at the French embassy in the U.S. to the ambassador of France, that baby is a citizen of France.

You are so hopelessly dumb.

 

[Dr. Phosphorous]

So are they smuggled or supplied? Why don't you make up your mind? Still waiting for evidence that we have provided AR-15s to Mexican cartels. You really are just full of shit, typical Democrat. You going to start singing now LOL

Why do I have to provide evidence when your MAGA gomer ass hasn't???

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

The 14th wasn't meant for Illegal Aliens, plain and simple.
This must be codified by the SCOTUS.
Roe your boats.

It has been. Calm down.

 

[Slade3200]

No. When it comes to being required to obey the laws of whatever land you happen to be in, there’s always a jurisdictional nexus.

You’re getting warmer at long last.

Now, it’s you’d be so kind, maybe you can address what the drafters said about who that Amendment did and didn’t cover.
There’s a clue lurking therein.

Those subject to the jurisdiction of the USA. Meaning everybody except Indians born on tribal land. The scotus case I pointed to brought into question foreign diplomats and reaffirmed what the civil rights act of 1866 outlined which was citizenship to those born on USA soil

 

[Slade3200]

But what was MEANT by “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” as used in the Amendment? See? That’s the actual question.

That’s exactly what the scotus case I linked to covered

 

[OKTexas]

How is birthright citizenship questionable? It's in the 14th Amendment.

Is it, it took a SCOTUS decision to implement it for foreign nationals, it only requires another SCOTUS decision to reverse it.

.

 

[Slade3200]

The 14th wasn't meant for Illegal Aliens, plain and simple.
This must be codified by the SCOTUS.
Roe your boats.

How do you know?

 

[BackAgain]

The congressman, like you, is making up an interpretation that is not supported by the actual language of the amendment.

No. He was addressing the meaning of the term IN the proposed Amendment AT THE TIME of the debates. At least try to get the facts straight.

I’ll go back to the line that YOU pointed out. Subject tot he jurisdiction if. What do you think the definition of jurisdiction is?

As I already noted. Try reading.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

How do you know?

Sea Major7 and Correll think their opinions are legal arguments.

No, really, they do.

 

[BackAgain]

That’s exactly what the scotus case I linked to covered

Nope. Since it wasn’t the matter being adjudicated, such comments are (at best) mere obiter dicta. Not a sniff of precedential value.

 

[Slade3200]

No. He was addressing the meaning of the term IN the proposed Amendment AT THE TIME of the debates. At least try to get the facts straight.

See that’s what you all like to do. Reinterpreting the meaning of words instead of just using the plain definition. That’s why you’ve avoided the half dozen times I’ve asked you to provide one.

You can’t just make up definitions and then pretend like they apply to your arguments. That’s cheap and lazy

 

[Slade3200]

Nope. Since it wasn’t the matter being adjudicated, such comments are (at best) mere obiter dicta. Not a sniff of precedential value.

The matter being adjudicated was the meaning of “subject to the jurisdiction”

 

[Dr. Phosphorous]

He won’t win overturning the 14th otherwise he will. Supreme Court is 6-3, Dr. Defect.

What did Obama say? “I ll Do it with you or without you” all the Democrats in Congress cheered. Biden defied court orders.

Precedents set

Trump is going to lose a lot more than that....especially the freeze on Federal funds. That's a massive violation of the Constitution.

But it's interesting that you admit Trump will lose the birthright citizenship case....you are admitting that Trump is an imbecile and crazy for even going there, but you support him anyway.

That definitely doesn't say anything good about you.

 

[AZrailwhale]

SecTres can look at those payments all he wants.

However, that does not mean that Elon Musk gets access to a Treasury system responsible for over $6 trillion in payments per year.

Musk is the legally appointed agent of the president. Just like Harry Hopkins was for FDR. Musk doesn’t have the power to do anything but observe and report, which is far less than Hopkins did. Hopkins was a combination of unofficial Sec State and National Security Advisor.

 

[Dr. Phosphorous]

Trump 2 democrats 0

Trump won in court for the employee buyouts and stopping payments.

About 7 cases still to be decided

The employee buyouts is nothing. The bigger battle will be over the involuntary Federal employee terminations.

And how has Trump won on stopping payments? He has not.

 

[Blisterfinger]

Why do I have to provide evidence when your MAGA gomer ass hasn't???

Because I think you're lying, and I'm sure I'm right about that. You claim we are supplying the cartel with weapons of war or was it smuggling? What is it stupid Democrat.