Trump to Exclude Illegal Aliens from Congressional Apportionment Counts

[Ame®icano]

The Constitution says all poeople shall be counted. All means citizens abd non-citizens.

At the time it wasn't considered that illegal aliens would be given sanctuary instead of being deported.

Doesn't it suck for you to have to admit to supporting the dilution of American citizen
representation by giving part of that representation to foreign national criminals?

In last Census, all people are counted.

Not all people get representation, just citizens.

The number of PEOPLE that are counted is used to apportion House seats. The 14th Amendment is very clear on this.

Everyone IS counted.

Person that are in the U.S. illegally don't get representation, since they should't be in the country anyways. Otherwise, you could have an influx of illegals at the time of census every ten years, just in time to get counted for appropriating seats, and go back afterwards.

Imagine having congressional district with 100,000 illegals and 100 voters, where those 100 would would get congressional seat. That's what basically happening in California, on a different scale.

And about 14th amendment, you should research what was its intent. The primary reason, other than balancing representation between slave states and free states, was because the Federal government was prevented direct taxation that wasn’t apportioned by states’ populations. The government, wanting as much revenue for the national government as the states would let them get away with, used as expansive a definition of personhood as they could get away with. They did this with full knowledge that tying taxation to total personhood would have included landless, native-born male citizens (and virtually all women) who, under the laws of their states, may have been just as ineligible to vote as the people who just got off the boats, of their own free will or otherwise.

By the way, when I say "you should research", it's just figure of speech, since I doubt you will do so. You're hopelessly stuck in your ideological labyrinth, and you know just what you've been told by your overlords, with complete lack of thought of your own.

The Amendment is written in plain English. You can talk intent all you want but that is 1 person's opinion

Are you stupid, retarded, or both?

Every single Amendment is written in plain English, but it doesn't bother you lefties to go around it when it's against what you want.

But lets go back to 14 Amendment and see who are the "persons" who are being represented, it's in the first sentence:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

People who sneak across the borders, and live wholly outside the laws of society, are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. They are alien invaders, not lawful immigrants. They are not persons that 14 Amendment is talking about, moron.

That is a question that you hneed to answer. It is written 8in plain English but you refuse to accept it.

"Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state. "

It clearly states the number of persons not citizens. That clearly makes what Trump wants to do unconstitutional. The Supreme Court is likely to do what they did on DACA and throw out Trump's order on procedural grounds.

Again, the same question for you. Are you stupid, retarded, or both?

Section 1 of the Amendment clarifies who are the "persons".

You are the one who is stupid retarded or both. Section 1 clarifies who is a citizen not a person. It says that every person shall be counted. It then uses the word citizen when it comes to voting. Clearly a distinction was intentional or they would have said citizens shall be counted rather than persons.

Section 1 clarifies persons who are the citizens. The persons they're are talking about specifically are freed slaves. Natives are also persons, but they were not considered citizens because they were "subject to the jurisdiction" of their own tribes. Illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction of United States, therefore they do not get representation in US government.

It's not really that hard to process it, unless you received your understanding of the federal Constitution from the government-controlled education system. Your first and lesser problem is comprehension of the issue, and second, bigger problem is that proper English word usage and meanings along with English concepts of implicit vs explicit, context defining meaning of words with multiple definitions, is ignored if they conflict with the true constitutional teachings.

I'll explain it just for you in simplest way possible, but I doubt you're intelligent enough to process it because of your above mentioned "government-controlled education". In order not to waste my time, let me present you with two sentences from two Amendments:

13th Amendment, Section 1. "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. "

14th Amendment, Section 1. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States... "

The question for you is... whose jurisdiction each Amendment is referring to?

It's not a trick question, and if you answer it correctly, I'll apologize to you and continue the discussion. However, failing to answer will eventually confirm what I, and others have suspected, or known about you. The stage is yours.

Just as I thought, busybee01 got tail between his legs.

 

[JoeB131]

Not quite. I think that bad things mostly happen to people who who deserve them. So check your reasoning, since whatever bad happened to you, happened despite of what I posted on this board.

Naw, what happened was because I injured my knee, and my boss decided to screw me. I actually had a pretty good case for medical discrimination. I just didn't feel like spending six years in court fighting it.

So when the SOcialists take over, round up all the capitalists and do one of these numbers on them, just remember, they had it coming, according to you.

You assume that because both, middle class, and union are in decline, that they're somehow related to each other.

It's an undeniable fact, buddy. The Republican Crazy, "I want to work harder for less money. But I'm Right with Jesus!!!"

Your graphs are all horseshit. Trump exists because even the White Working Class knows it's in decline. They just fall for Trump's racism of blaming people of color for it.

Great, you took a course, you get better at something (management, I guess), and you succeeded. For that, you and only you should take a credit for and enjoy the fruits of your labor. Now, since you're a business owner, hurry up and unionize.

When I have more employees other than my self, I'll consider it. Right now, I'm making a comfortable living, I really don't want to expand beyond what I'm currently doing.

The idea of screwing over people so I can live better, I see that as a mental flaw.

 

[JoeB131]

There is no way that you can talk yourself away from the obvious truth, here, which is that what you defend and advocate directly, explicitly amounts top allowing foreign nationals to interfere with how America's government is run.

Meh, there here, they have as much right to influence how the government is run as anyone else. The fact is, what you guys propose is impractical and unconstitutional.

Not just, as your absurd and disprove conspiracy theory alleges, allowing a distant foreign government to put advertising material before the American people in an effort to influence our vote, but directly giving Congressional representation to foreigners, including invading foreign criminals whose side you treasonously take against that of your own country and your own fellow Americans.

Except foreigners wont have representation, as they can't actually vote. The fact is, those people are every bit as much my "fellow Americans" as you are. If anything, their ancestors are native to this continent, while ours are invaders from Europe.

Even if your ridiculous conspiracy theory was true, if what it accuses President Trump of having done is wrong, then what you defend and advocate is far more wrong.

Not really. Here's the thing, unless you are a native American, you are an immigrant. Period. America, is of course, white people slaughtering natives and exploiting the labor of people of color. Now, OH MY GOD, PEOPLE OF COLOR ARE GETTING REPRESENTATION.

I don't see undocumented immigrants as the problem, but if I did, there's a simple solution.

Go after the rich white people who hire them because they can't get Americans to work for shit wages in shit conditions.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Meh, there here, they have as much right to influence how the government is run as anyone else. The fact is, what you guys propose is impractical and unconstitutional.

No, absolutely not.

Only citizens are entitled to any say in how our country is to be run.

To allow foreigners any such say is a severe violation of our right to exist as a sovereign nation, and borders on treason.

The fact is, those people are every bit as much my "fellow Americans" as you are. If anything, their ancestors are native to this continent, while ours are invaders from Europe.

Well, except for that little detail that they are not Americans at all.

Except foreigners wont have representation, as they can't actually vote.

Counting them toward Congressional and Electoral College representation is giving them representation in government which they absolutely should not be allowed to have.

Not really. Here's the thing, unless you are a native American, you are an immigrant.

I am a native American. I was born here, in America, have lived here all my life, will surely die here, and whatever disposition is made of my mortal remains will occur here. I have never held any citizenship in, nor any allegiance to, any other nation but this one. The same is true of all my parents, grandparents, and great grandparents, and of some ancestral lines going back as long as the United States of America has existed as a nation. I have at least two ancestral lines that are known to have been here since the 1600s.

To what place am I native, if not to America?

 

[JoeB131]

No, absolutely not.

Only citizens are entitled to any say in how our country is to be run.

To allow foreigners any such say is a severe violation of our right to exist as a sovereign nation, and borders on treason.

Yawn... you guys have no problem when THIS Foreigner has a say in how our country is run.

Might want to check your hypocrisy there, Mormon Bob.

Counting them toward Congressional and Electoral College representation is giving them representation in government which they absolutely should not be allowed to have.

Too bad 200 years of precedence and common sense says otherwise.

I am a native American. I was born here, in America, have lived here all my life, will surely die here, and whatever disposition is made of my mortal remains will occur here. I have never held any citizenship in, nor any allegiance to, any other nation but this one. The same is true of all my parents, grandparents, and great grandparents, and of some ancestral lines going back as long as the United States of America has existed as a nation. I have at least two ancestral lines that are known to have been here since the 1600s.

To what place am I native, if not to America?

Judging by your last name, Scotland. Look, buddy, "My Racist ancestors stole this country fair and square" isn't much of an argument.

Or at least, you can't whine when other groups come in and take it over from you.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Yawn... you guys have no problem when THIS Foreigner has a say in how our country is run.

Might want to check your hypocrisy there, Mormon Bob.

I had to do a Google Image search to identify him. He's foreign born, but he immigrated legally, and long ago became a citizen of the United States, giving up his Australian citizenship in the process. Unlike the invading foreign criminals whose side you treasonously take, he is a citizen, and as such, entitled to the same representation in government as any other citizen.

What point do you think you are making, here?

To what place am I native, if not to America?

Judging by your last name, Scotland.

That is absurd, though entirely par for you.

I have never set foot on Scottish soil. I have never come within several thousand miles of Scotland. I have, in fact, in my entirely life, never been more than about a hundred or so miles from North America. Only twice have I ever, very briefly, been outside the borders of the United States.

My great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather Thomas Blalock came from England some time in the 17th century. I haven't been able to trace that line much farther back than that. He may have had ancestors from Scotland, but if so, that's farther back than I've so far traced that line.

 

[badbob85037]

Illegal aliens will not be counted for purposes of congressional apportioning thanks to a memorandum set to be signed by President Trump on Tuesday.Congressional seats and electoral college votes are currently divided up by counting all persons in each district, including illegal aliens. This allows states like California, New York, and Florida to receive more congressional seats and electoral college votes, while diluting political power in states with small illegal alien populations.

First, the Census doesn't make a distinction between legal, illegal or natural born people. They merely count people.

Second, Trump will be long gone by the time they start allocating seats.

So this is Trump playing to the racists, again.

It was that fuck 0bama that took the question off the censes. Only an idiot would count illegals to determine the representation of American citizens. Is there anything for you that doesn't have to do with racism. Here's two free clues. To find a good job you have to look for a good job. The term illegal has nothing to do with race. The next one will cost you.

 

[JoeB131]

I had to do a Google Image search to identify him. He's foreign born, but he immigrated legally, and long ago became a citizen of the United States, giving up his Australian citizenship in the process. Unlike the invading foreign criminals whose side you treasonously take, he is a citizen, and as such, entitled to the same representation in government as any other citizen.

What point do you think you are making, here?

The only reason why Murdoch became an American citizen was because they passed requirements that he had to be to own TV stations. He didn't become a citizen until 1985, but he was trying to influence our country long before that through his trashy newspapers. (For instance, he breifly owned the Chicago Sun-Times and man, did the quality of that paper drop!)

And I'm sure you had no problem with that.

I have never set foot on Scottish soil. I have never come within several thousand miles of Scotland. I have, in fact, in my entirely life, never been more than about a hundred or so miles from North America. Only twice have I ever, very briefly, been outside the borders of the United States.

Yes, we can tell. We can tell that you are xenophobic and have no understanding of other cultures.

The point remains. You aren't native to here. You are an invader. If the Native Americans murdered Columbus on his first voyage, you'd have never gotten here.

This is the problem with America... we are built on a foundation of slavery, genocide and the exploitation of immigrant labor. You can't solve your problems of the present without admitting your sins of the past.

 

[JoeB131]

It was that fuck 0bama that took the question off the censes. Only an idiot would count illegals to determine the representation of American citizens. Is there anything for you that doesn't have to do with racism. Here's two free clues. To find a good job you have to look for a good job. The term illegal has nothing to do with race. The next one will cost you.

Uh, no, guy, the Citizenship question was taken off the Census in 1960. Before Obama was born. Before Obama was even a fetus in Kenya!!! (Just kidding, we all know he was born in Hawaii).

The census has always counted ALL PERSONS, Citizen and alien alike.

Now, here's the thing. The Census bureau already has a hard time counting people. Only 70% of forms were returned in 2010. The rest had to be counted by Enumerators going door to door. Not sure how this is going to be accomplished this year with Covid, they'll probably have to do that follow up next year.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The only reason why Murdoch became an American citizen was because they passed requirements that he had to be to own TV stations. He didn't become a citizen until 1985, but he was trying to influence our country long before that through his trashy newspapers. (For instance, he breifly [sic] owned the Chicago Sun-Times and man, did the quality of that paper drop!)

And I'm sure you had no problem with that.

Until he became a citizen, he had no representation in Congress, or in the Electoral College, and no vote. Since he became a citizen, he has all of these; which is exactly as it should be. Whatever his motives were for renouncing his Australian citizenship to become an American citizen, is beside the point. And whatever you think of the quality of his media is completely irrelevant.

And even a foreigner has a right to express his opinions, through whatever media he is able to legitimately access for that purpose. A foreigner just is not entitled, under any circumstances, to a vote or to representation in our government.

The point remains. You aren't native to here. You are an invader.

Your point is bullshit. I am native to America, and not to any other place. I am several generations removed from the nearest among my ancestors who were native to anywhere else or who came from anywhere else. I, myself, have never been anywhere near any place to which you would claim that I am native.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Why do you need to count illegal aliens in the census?

As a favor to the DNC, obviously.

 

[JoeB131]

Until he became a citizen, he had no representation in Congress, or in the Electoral College, and no vote.

No, he just had control of American newspapers that spread the news and shaped public opinion... Come on, Bob, get real. He has a lot more influence than some poor day laborer who can't vote.

And even a foreigner has a right to express his opinions, through whatever media he is able to legitimately access for that purpose. A foreigner just is not entitled, under any circumstances, to a vote or to representation in our government.

Well, good thing they don't have that, then. But apportionment is still called for and defined in the Constitutions as all persons residing in the US, Citizen and non-citizen alike.

Your point is @bullshit. I am native to America, and not to any other place. I am several generations removed from the nearest among my ancestors who were native to anywhere else or who came from anywhere else. I, myself, have never been anywhere near any place to which you would claim that I am native.

Then by your logic, anyone who travels here is native... and has just as many rights as you have...

Not to worry, you'll soon be getting your ticket to the Planet Kolob...

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Your point is @bullshit. I am native to America, and not to any other place. I am several generations removed from the nearest among my ancestors who were native to anywhere else or who came from anywhere else. I, myself, have never been anywhere near any place to which you would claim that I am native.

Then by your logic, anyone who travels here is native... and has just as many rights as you have...

No rational understanding of anything that I've said suggests any such thing. I'm not some mere traveler who just arrived here, from another nation, who bears any allegiance to some other nation, and whose future plans to remain here or leave are in any doubt.

First and foremost, I am a legal citizen of this nation, and my allegiance is exclusively to this nation, with no connection nor allegiance, even in any slight measure, to any other nation.

And I am someone who was born here, and have lived here all my life. My ancestors have all been born here, all the way back to all of my great grandparents, going back for more than a century. Some of my ancestral lines have been here for three or four hundred years, since long before the United States even existed as a sovereign nation.

To suggest that I am in any way comparable to “anyone who travels here” is absurd, even for you.

 

[JoeB131]

No rational understanding of anything that I've said suggests any such thing. I'm not some mere traveler who just arrived here, from another nation, who bears any allegiance to some other nation, and whose future plans to remain here or leave are in any doubt.

No, you are a white person who lives in a country built by slaves, stolen from Natives and kept afloat by the undocumented laborers who do all the shit jobs you don't want to do. You're a Saint, Bob.

To suggest that I am in any way comparable to “anyone who travels here” is absurd, even for you.

Naw, man, absurd is you thinking you are better than anyone else...

 

[Crixus]

ROFLMOA, Libtard heads exploding across the GLOBE! I CAN HEAR THEM NOW!

Trump to Exclude Illegal Aliens from Congressional Apportionment Counts

Illegal aliens will not be counted for purposes of congressional apportioning thanks to a memorandum set to be signed by President Trump.

www.breitbart.com

Illegal aliens will not be counted for purposes of congressional apportioning thanks to a memorandum set to be signed by President Trump on Tuesday.​

​

Congressional seats and electoral college votes are currently divided up by counting all persons in each district, including illegal aliens. This allows states like California, New York, and Florida to receive more congressional seats and electoral college votes, while diluting political power in states with small illegal alien populations.​

Again. The Supreme Court already dealt with this. Nice try though.

trumpkins are imbeciles

Yes, jillian, Liberals have a zero attention span and don't actually read USSC decisions.

they dont pretend to read them. tbey take the news word for it.

 

[Ame®icano]

Not quite. I think that bad things mostly happen to people who who deserve them. So check your reasoning, since whatever bad happened to you, happened despite of what I posted on this board.

Naw, what happened was because I injured my knee, and my boss decided to screw me. I actually had a pretty good case for medical discrimination. I just didn't feel like spending six years in court fighting it.

I thought your claim was that bad things happened to you because some day in future you would disagree with me on this board. It gotta sucks to be you.

You assume that because both, middle class, and union are in decline, that they're somehow related to each other.

It's an undeniable fact, buddy. The Republican Crazy, "I want to work harder for less money. But I'm Right with Jesus!!!"

Your graphs are all horseshit. Trump exists because even the White Working Class knows it's in decline. They just fall for Trump's racism of blaming people of color for it.

Wait, wait, wait... you're saying that decline of unions caused decline of middle class. Then I show you a graph (which is from census bureau, bu the way) and you flat out reject it, because it doesn't fit your claim. You can claim whatever you want, but the truth is that with decline of unions Americans are doing much better.

Great, you took a course, you get better at something (management, I guess), and you succeeded. For that, you and only you should take a credit for and enjoy the fruits of your labor. Now, since you're a business owner, hurry up and unionize.

When I have more employees other than my self, I'll consider it. Right now, I'm making a comfortable living, I really don't want to expand beyond what I'm currently doing.

The idea of screwing over people so I can live better, I see that as a mental flaw.

Oh, you don't want to screw over people so you can live better, but you make comfortable living by screwing over people when you charge them for your services.

Interesting take.

 

[Ame®icano]

The Constitution says all poeople shall be counted. All means citizens abd non-citizens.

At the time it wasn't considered that illegal aliens would be given sanctuary instead of being deported.

Doesn't it suck for you to have to admit to supporting the dilution of American citizen
representation by giving part of that representation to foreign national criminals?

In last Census, all people are counted.

Not all people get representation, just citizens.

The number of PEOPLE that are counted is used to apportion House seats. The 14th Amendment is very clear on this.

Everyone IS counted.

Person that are in the U.S. illegally don't get representation, since they should't be in the country anyways. Otherwise, you could have an influx of illegals at the time of census every ten years, just in time to get counted for appropriating seats, and go back afterwards.

Imagine having congressional district with 100,000 illegals and 100 voters, where those 100 would would get congressional seat. That's what basically happening in California, on a different scale.

And about 14th amendment, you should research what was its intent. The primary reason, other than balancing representation between slave states and free states, was because the Federal government was prevented direct taxation that wasn’t apportioned by states’ populations. The government, wanting as much revenue for the national government as the states would let them get away with, used as expansive a definition of personhood as they could get away with. They did this with full knowledge that tying taxation to total personhood would have included landless, native-born male citizens (and virtually all women) who, under the laws of their states, may have been just as ineligible to vote as the people who just got off the boats, of their own free will or otherwise.

By the way, when I say "you should research", it's just figure of speech, since I doubt you will do so. You're hopelessly stuck in your ideological labyrinth, and you know just what you've been told by your overlords, with complete lack of thought of your own.

The Amendment is written in plain English. You can talk intent all you want but that is 1 person's opinion

Are you stupid, retarded, or both?

Every single Amendment is written in plain English, but it doesn't bother you lefties to go around it when it's against what you want.

But lets go back to 14 Amendment and see who are the "persons" who are being represented, it's in the first sentence:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

People who sneak across the borders, and live wholly outside the laws of society, are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. They are alien invaders, not lawful immigrants. They are not persons that 14 Amendment is talking about, moron.

That is a question that you hneed to answer. It is written 8in plain English but you refuse to accept it.

"Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state. "

It clearly states the number of persons not citizens. That clearly makes what Trump wants to do unconstitutional. The Supreme Court is likely to do what they did on DACA and throw out Trump's order on procedural grounds.

Again, the same question for you. Are you stupid, retarded, or both?

Section 1 of the Amendment clarifies who are the "persons".

You are the one who is stupid retarded or both. Section 1 clarifies who is a citizen not a person. It says that every person shall be counted. It then uses the word citizen when it comes to voting. Clearly a distinction was intentional or they would have said citizens shall be counted rather than persons.

Section 1 clarifies persons who are the citizens. The persons they're are talking about specifically are freed slaves. Natives are also persons, but they were not considered citizens because they were "subject to the jurisdiction" of their own tribes. Illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction of United States, therefore they do not get representation in US government.

It's not really that hard to process it, unless you received your understanding of the federal Constitution from the government-controlled education system. Your first and lesser problem is comprehension of the issue, and second, bigger problem is that proper English word usage and meanings along with English concepts of implicit vs explicit, context defining meaning of words with multiple definitions, is ignored if they conflict with the true constitutional teachings.

I'll explain it just for you in simplest way possible, but I doubt you're intelligent enough to process it because of your above mentioned "government-controlled education". In order not to waste my time, let me present you with two sentences from two Amendments:

13th Amendment, Section 1. "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. "

14th Amendment, Section 1. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States... "

The question for you is... whose jurisdiction each Amendment is referring to?

It's not a trick question, and if you answer it correctly, I'll apologize to you and continue the discussion. However, failing to answer will eventually confirm what I, and others have suspected, or known about you. The stage is yours.

Hey, busybee01, still no reply? It's not that you are not around, since you posting in other threads for the past three days. So where is the problem?

 

[busybee01]

The Constitution says all poeople shall be counted. All means citizens abd non-citizens.

At the time it wasn't considered that illegal aliens would be given sanctuary instead of being deported.

Doesn't it suck for you to have to admit to supporting the dilution of American citizen
representation by giving part of that representation to foreign national criminals?

In last Census, all people are counted.

Not all people get representation, just citizens.

The number of PEOPLE that are counted is used to apportion House seats. The 14th Amendment is very clear on this.

Everyone IS counted.

Person that are in the U.S. illegally don't get representation, since they should't be in the country anyways. Otherwise, you could have an influx of illegals at the time of census every ten years, just in time to get counted for appropriating seats, and go back afterwards.

Imagine having congressional district with 100,000 illegals and 100 voters, where those 100 would would get congressional seat. That's what basically happening in California, on a different scale.

And about 14th amendment, you should research what was its intent. The primary reason, other than balancing representation between slave states and free states, was because the Federal government was prevented direct taxation that wasn’t apportioned by states’ populations. The government, wanting as much revenue for the national government as the states would let them get away with, used as expansive a definition of personhood as they could get away with. They did this with full knowledge that tying taxation to total personhood would have included landless, native-born male citizens (and virtually all women) who, under the laws of their states, may have been just as ineligible to vote as the people who just got off the boats, of their own free will or otherwise.

By the way, when I say "you should research", it's just figure of speech, since I doubt you will do so. You're hopelessly stuck in your ideological labyrinth, and you know just what you've been told by your overlords, with complete lack of thought of your own.

The Amendment is written in plain English. You can talk intent all you want but that is 1 person's opinion

Are you stupid, retarded, or both?

Every single Amendment is written in plain English, but it doesn't bother you lefties to go around it when it's against what you want.

But lets go back to 14 Amendment and see who are the "persons" who are being represented, it's in the first sentence:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

People who sneak across the borders, and live wholly outside the laws of society, are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. They are alien invaders, not lawful immigrants. They are not persons that 14 Amendment is talking about, moron.

That is a question that you hneed to answer. It is written 8in plain English but you refuse to accept it.

"Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state. "

It clearly states the number of persons not citizens. That clearly makes what Trump wants to do unconstitutional. The Supreme Court is likely to do what they did on DACA and throw out Trump's order on procedural grounds.

Again, the same question for you. Are you stupid, retarded, or both?

Section 1 of the Amendment clarifies who are the "persons".

You are the one who is stupid retarded or both. Section 1 clarifies who is a citizen not a person. It says that every person shall be counted. It then uses the word citizen when it comes to voting. Clearly a distinction was intentional or they would have said citizens shall be counted rather than persons.

Section 1 clarifies persons who are the citizens. The persons they're are talking about specifically are freed slaves. Natives are also persons, but they were not considered citizens because they were "subject to the jurisdiction" of their own tribes. Illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction of United States, therefore they do not get representation in US government.

It's not really that hard to process it, unless you received your understanding of the federal Constitution from the government-controlled education system. Your first and lesser problem is comprehension of the issue, and second, bigger problem is that proper English word usage and meanings along with English concepts of implicit vs explicit, context defining meaning of words with multiple definitions, is ignored if they conflict with the true constitutional teachings.

I'll explain it just for you in simplest way possible, but I doubt you're intelligent enough to process it because of your above mentioned "government-controlled education". In order not to waste my time, let me present you with two sentences from two Amendments:

13th Amendment, Section 1. "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. "

14th Amendment, Section 1. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States... "

The question for you is... whose jurisdiction each Amendment is referring to?

It's not a trick question, and if you answer it correctly, I'll apologize to you and continue the discussion. However, failing to answer will eventually confirm what I, and others have suspected, or known about you. The stage is yours.

Just as I thought, busybee01 got tail between his legs.

I(n the section that is in question, they use persons as who counts in terms of Congressional representation. They use the word citizen as to who should be able to vote. Clearly they meant persons and citizens to mean 2 different things.

Section 2.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

In section 1 they confer certain rights to persons who are not citizens.

You have your tail up Trump's ass to suck it.

 

[busybee01]

The Constitution says all poeople shall be counted. All means citizens abd non-citizens.

At the time it wasn't considered that illegal aliens would be given sanctuary instead of being deported.

Doesn't it suck for you to have to admit to supporting the dilution of American citizen
representation by giving part of that representation to foreign national criminals?

In last Census, all people are counted.

Not all people get representation, just citizens.

The number of PEOPLE that are counted is used to apportion House seats. The 14th Amendment is very clear on this.

Everyone IS counted.

Person that are in the U.S. illegally don't get representation, since they should't be in the country anyways. Otherwise, you could have an influx of illegals at the time of census every ten years, just in time to get counted for appropriating seats, and go back afterwards.

Imagine having congressional district with 100,000 illegals and 100 voters, where those 100 would would get congressional seat. That's what basically happening in California, on a different scale.

And about 14th amendment, you should research what was its intent. The primary reason, other than balancing representation between slave states and free states, was because the Federal government was prevented direct taxation that wasn’t apportioned by states’ populations. The government, wanting as much revenue for the national government as the states would let them get away with, used as expansive a definition of personhood as they could get away with. They did this with full knowledge that tying taxation to total personhood would have included landless, native-born male citizens (and virtually all women) who, under the laws of their states, may have been just as ineligible to vote as the people who just got off the boats, of their own free will or otherwise.

By the way, when I say "you should research", it's just figure of speech, since I doubt you will do so. You're hopelessly stuck in your ideological labyrinth, and you know just what you've been told by your overlords, with complete lack of thought of your own.

The Amendment is written in plain English. You can talk intent all you want but that is 1 person's opinion

Are you stupid, retarded, or both?

Every single Amendment is written in plain English, but it doesn't bother you lefties to go around it when it's against what you want.

But lets go back to 14 Amendment and see who are the "persons" who are being represented, it's in the first sentence:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

People who sneak across the borders, and live wholly outside the laws of society, are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. They are alien invaders, not lawful immigrants. They are not persons that 14 Amendment is talking about, moron.

That is a question that you hneed to answer. It is written 8in plain English but you refuse to accept it.

"Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state. "

It clearly states the number of persons not citizens. That clearly makes what Trump wants to do unconstitutional. The Supreme Court is likely to do what they did on DACA and throw out Trump's order on procedural grounds.

Again, the same question for you. Are you stupid, retarded, or both?

Section 1 of the Amendment clarifies who are the "persons".

You are the one who is stupid retarded or both. Section 1 clarifies who is a citizen not a person. It says that every person shall be counted. It then uses the word citizen when it comes to voting. Clearly a distinction was intentional or they would have said citizens shall be counted rather than persons.

Section 1 clarifies persons who are the citizens. The persons they're are talking about specifically are freed slaves. Natives are also persons, but they were not considered citizens because they were "subject to the jurisdiction" of their own tribes. Illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction of United States, therefore they do not get representation in US government.

It's not really that hard to process it, unless you received your understanding of the federal Constitution from the government-controlled education system. Your first and lesser problem is comprehension of the issue, and second, bigger problem is that proper English word usage and meanings along with English concepts of implicit vs explicit, context defining meaning of words with multiple definitions, is ignored if they conflict with the true constitutional teachings.

I'll explain it just for you in simplest way possible, but I doubt you're intelligent enough to process it because of your above mentioned "government-controlled education". In order not to waste my time, let me present you with two sentences from two Amendments:

13th Amendment, Section 1. "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. "

14th Amendment, Section 1. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States... "

The question for you is... whose jurisdiction each Amendment is referring to?

It's not a trick question, and if you answer it correctly, I'll apologize to you and continue the discussion. However, failing to answer will eventually confirm what I, and others have suspected, or known about you. The stage is yours.

Hey, busybee01, still no reply? It's not that you are not around, since you posting in other threads for the past three days. So where is the problem?

Believe it or not I have a life unlike you.

 

[JoeB131]

I thought your claim was that bad things happened to you because some day in future you would disagree with me on this board. It gotta sucks to be you.

That wasn't my claim at all. You see, because i am not an awful person, I don't wish bad things to happen to people because they have awful views on a message board. It's called "Being a decent human being", but I doubt you understand the concept.

Wait, wait, wait... you're saying that decline of unions caused decline of middle class.

I'm not just saying it, it's an indisputable fact.

But it's okay, Trump has got you and Mormon Bob blaming Mexicans for that, because you are awful people.

Oh, you don't want to screw over people so you can live better, but you make comfortable living by screwing over people when you charge them for your services.

Actually, I charge them for my time and expertise. My prices are actually lower than the market because I realize that most of my clients work for a living. Given that most of them end up getting better paying jobs, or out of jobs they hate with my help, they are the ones coming out ahead.