Trump to Paul Ryan: Shut up, for you know nothing about birthright citizenship

[Harry Dresden]

Ryan exemplifies exactly what is wrong with the GOP. The sooner he is gone, the better.

So, offering a respectful & correct opinion, afforded by the 1st A, is something you hate?

I see Trump's infection of MY nation has gone further into the shit hole nation realm than even I had imagined.

Thank you for admitting you HATE freedom of speech & The Constitution.

No, you stupid f*ing idiot. I hate people who make promises to their supporters right before an election when they have no intention of keeping them. And the "infection" in your nation (whichever one that is) has gone further into the shithole because of idiots like you who vote for Marxists like Obama. Now you can go crawl back under your slimy rock.

Oh, Obama hasn't been POTUS for nearly two years but thanks for letting everyone here know that Obama still haunts you & that you are a racist that hates blacks.

how does what he said means he hates blacks?...

 

[caddo kid]

Yes, just like I stated in the first sentence you quoted = WE ARE TALKING ABOUT changing a Constitutional Amendment.

The other dumbass brought the concept of the 'nuclear option' into the conversation; that deals with POTUS nominees.

I see you also are NOT very good at paying attention.

No the 14th is not being changed, its being interpreted.

Section 1, first sentence, 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.

An illegal steps over the border and pops out an anchor baby, they are not "residing" in a state. I don't think an illegal can legally reside in a state. Squat maybe but they are not a legal resident. If Trump pushes this into the SCOTUS you fools won't like the ruling.

Trump stated he would EO the Amendment; why? He wants it CHANGED.

Changed, interpreted = semantics

THE FACT REMAINS the other member brought the concept of 'the nuclear option' into the conversation, which deals with POTUS nominees. That has NOTHING to do with Amendments.

Me & you are basically on the same page so, I'm not sure why you're being a jack ass but oh well.

Breaking: SCOTUS rules the 14th amendment does not grant citizenship to illegals, liberals butthurt.

I could care less about the 14th:

Obviously. You people don't care about any of it.

That's why Americans have become so dreadfully cross with you.

You cut the full quote:

I said I care about SHIT STAIN TRUMP being truthful; which he is nothing more than a SHIT STAIN LIAR.

I also said I care about policy aka the CORRECT PROCEDURE to remedy an Amendment, if so desired.

You cut off my quote because you are a coward *****. GO FYS

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

No the 14th is not being changed, its being interpreted.

Section 1, first sentence, 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.

An illegal steps over the border and pops out an anchor baby, they are not "residing" in a state. I don't think an illegal can legally reside in a state. Squat maybe but they are not a legal resident. If Trump pushes this into the SCOTUS you fools won't like the ruling.

Trump stated he would EO the Amendment; why? He wants it CHANGED.

Changed, interpreted = semantics

THE FACT REMAINS the other member brought the concept of 'the nuclear option' into the conversation, which deals with POTUS nominees. That has NOTHING to do with Amendments.

Me & you are basically on the same page so, I'm not sure why you're being a jack ass but oh well.

Breaking: SCOTUS rules the 14th amendment does not grant citizenship to illegals, liberals butthurt.

I could care less about the 14th:

Obviously. You people don't care about any of it.

That's why Americans have become so dreadfully cross with you.

You cut the full quote:

I said I care about SHIT STAIN TRUMP being truthful; which he is nothing more than a SHIT STAIN LIAR.

I also said I care about policy aka the CORRECT PROCEDURE to remedy an Amendment, if so desired.

You cut off my quote because you are a coward *****. GO FYS

No, I cut off the quote, but left the gist of your message, as your numbered points are puerile at best.

Here's your full quote -

I could care less about the 14th: What I do care is about
(1) truth = Trump doesn't have that
(2) policy = Trump doesn't know what that means AFA the concept of changing any part of any Amendment
(3) having a POTUS with a brain that doesn't look stupid = Trump has no brain & he looks & sounds stupid

 

[caddo kid]

Trump stated he would EO the Amendment; why? He wants it CHANGED.

Changed, interpreted = semantics

THE FACT REMAINS the other member brought the concept of 'the nuclear option' into the conversation, which deals with POTUS nominees. That has NOTHING to do with Amendments.

Me & you are basically on the same page so, I'm not sure why you're being a jack ass but oh well.

Breaking: SCOTUS rules the 14th amendment does not grant citizenship to illegals, liberals butthurt.

I could care less about the 14th:

Obviously. You people don't care about any of it.

That's why Americans have become so dreadfully cross with you.

You cut the full quote:

I said I care about SHIT STAIN TRUMP being truthful; which he is nothing more than a SHIT STAIN LIAR.

I also said I care about policy aka the CORRECT PROCEDURE to remedy an Amendment, if so desired.

You cut off my quote because you are a coward *****. GO FYS

No, I cut off the quote, but left the gist of your message, as your numbered points are puerile at best.

Here's your full quote -

I could care less about the 14th: What I do care is about
(1) truth = Trump doesn't have that
(2) policy = Trump doesn't know what that means AFA the concept of changing any part of any Amendment
(3) having a POTUS with a brain that doesn't look stupid = Trump has no brain & he looks & sounds stupid

puerile? LOL

no, that is Trump; he thinks the 14th Amendment can be EOed.

That stupid sack-O-shit didn't even pass 5th grade civics class, obviously.

He was out fvcking Kathy in her ass, under the bleachers instead.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I used to think Ryan had a brain. That was some time ago. His comments on the birthright matter only serve to cement my opinion.

Everyone knows, including Trump, that he cannot erase the matter with a mere Executive Order. He can however steer the matter into the judicial system and into the Supreme Court.

Ryan is juat another know-nothing leftist with an R in front of is name.

 

[caddo kid]

I used to think Ryan had a brain. That was some time ago. His comments on the birthright matter only serve to cement my opinion.

Everyone knows, including Trump, that he cannot erase the matter with a mere Executive Order. He can however steer the matter into the judicial system and into the Supreme Court.

Ryan is juat another know-nothing leftist with an R in front of is name.

 

[Care4all]

except diplomats who are under the jurisdiction of their own country, ( and Native Americans at the time) children born on our soil, are US Citizens.

The 14th amendment could have easily stated those born of citizens or those born of only legal residents, or mentioned this was for newly freed slaves only....

BUT IT DIDN'T.....

It stated all children born, on our soil, under our jurisdiction, are citizens.... foreign diplomats are NOT under our jurisdiction, so THEIR CHILDREN are not US Citizens... diplomats are not under our jurisdiction, they have Diplomatic Immunity in the USA.

It was important in the 14th that ALL under our jurisdiction born on our soil to be included, because we had millions born on our soil with Scottish, and Irish, and Italian decent etc....that were not US citizens themselves....

or even here legally

and if the 14th were interpreted in any other way than what it was, the children of all of those white immigrants, would lose their citizenship.... and America was trying to POPULATE the nation and get more Europeans to immigrate here... and the one way we did this, was by making the citizenship of their children easy, through jus soli citizenship.

https://www.history.com/news/birthright-citizenship-history-united-states

The executive order or a new law by congress to change the 14th amendment would be challenged immediately as being unconstitutional... and would make it to the Supreme court on that challenge, for the Supreme court to re-evaluate, but I see no way the Supreme court could rule any differently that they have previously on the decision of what the 14th amendment meant....

and it would still need an amendment to the constitution to change it.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

except diplomats who are under the jurisdiction of their own country, children born on our soil, are US Citizens.

The 14th amendment could have easily stated those born of citizens or those born of only legal residents, or mentioned this was for newly freed slaves only....

BUT IT DIDN'T.....

It stated all children born, on our soil, under our jurisdiction, are citizens.... foreign diplomats are NOT under our jurisdiction, so THEIR CHILDREN are not US Citizens... diplomats are not under our jurisdiction, they have Diplomatic Immunity in the USA.

It was important in the 14th that ALL under our jurisdiction born on our soil to be included, because we had millions born on our soil with Scottish, and Irish, and Italian decent etc....that were not US citizens themselves....

or even here legally

and if the 14th were interpreted in any other way than what it was, the children of all of those white immigrants, would lose their citizenship.... and America was trying to POPULATE the nation and get more Europeans to immigrate here... and the one way we did this, was by making the citizenship of their children easy, through jus soli citizenship.

https://www.history.com/news/birthright-citizenship-history-united-states

The executive order or a new law by congress to change the 14th amendment would be challenged immediately as being unconstitutional... and would make it to the Supreme court on that challenge, for the Supreme court to re-evaluate, but I see no way the Supreme court could rule any differently that they have previously on the decision of what the 14th amendment meant....

and it would still need an amendment to the constitution to change it.

Well, it's our country. We can do what we want.

Just watch.

 

[Care4all]

except diplomats who are under the jurisdiction of their own country, children born on our soil, are US Citizens.

The 14th amendment could have easily stated those born of citizens or those born of only legal residents, or mentioned this was for newly freed slaves only....

BUT IT DIDN'T.....

It stated all children born, on our soil, under our jurisdiction, are citizens.... foreign diplomats are NOT under our jurisdiction, so THEIR CHILDREN are not US Citizens... diplomats are not under our jurisdiction, they have Diplomatic Immunity in the USA.

It was important in the 14th that ALL under our jurisdiction born on our soil to be included, because we had millions born on our soil with Scottish, and Irish, and Italian decent etc....that were not US citizens themselves....

or even here legally

and if the 14th were interpreted in any other way than what it was, the children of all of those white immigrants, would lose their citizenship.... and America was trying to POPULATE the nation and get more Europeans to immigrate here... and the one way we did this, was by making the citizenship of their children easy, through jus soli citizenship.

https://www.history.com/news/birthright-citizenship-history-united-states

The executive order or a new law by congress to change the 14th amendment would be challenged immediately as being unconstitutional... and would make it to the Supreme court on that challenge, for the Supreme court to re-evaluate, but I see no way the Supreme court could rule any differently that they have previously on the decision of what the 14th amendment meant....

and it would still need an amendment to the constitution to change it.

Well, it's our country. We can do what we want.

Just watch.

Sure we can, but it will take a Constitutional Amendment to do it... there is a procedure in law/the constitution, on how to handle it... and an executive order, aint it.... nor is a law from congress to replace an amendment in the Constitution legal.

God Bless the Constitution, that a simple law or E/O, can NOT tear it apart!!!!

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

except diplomats who are under the jurisdiction of their own country, children born on our soil, are US Citizens.

The 14th amendment could have easily stated those born of citizens or those born of only legal residents, or mentioned this was for newly freed slaves only....

BUT IT DIDN'T.....

It stated all children born, on our soil, under our jurisdiction, are citizens.... foreign diplomats are NOT under our jurisdiction, so THEIR CHILDREN are not US Citizens... diplomats are not under our jurisdiction, they have Diplomatic Immunity in the USA.

It was important in the 14th that ALL under our jurisdiction born on our soil to be included, because we had millions born on our soil with Scottish, and Irish, and Italian decent etc....that were not US citizens themselves....

or even here legally

and if the 14th were interpreted in any other way than what it was, the children of all of those white immigrants, would lose their citizenship.... and America was trying to POPULATE the nation and get more Europeans to immigrate here... and the one way we did this, was by making the citizenship of their children easy, through jus soli citizenship.

https://www.history.com/news/birthright-citizenship-history-united-states

The executive order or a new law by congress to change the 14th amendment would be challenged immediately as being unconstitutional... and would make it to the Supreme court on that challenge, for the Supreme court to re-evaluate, but I see no way the Supreme court could rule any differently that they have previously on the decision of what the 14th amendment meant....

and it would still need an amendment to the constitution to change it.

Well, it's our country. We can do what we want.

Just watch.

Sure we can, but it will take a Constitutional Amendment to do it... there is a procedure in law, on how to handle it... and an executive order, aint it.... nor is a law from congress to replace an amendment in the Constitution legal.

God Bless the Constitution, that a simple law, can NOT tear it apart!!!!

Indeed, but on the border it's a national security issue, mandated by the Constitution and not bound by Posse Comitatus.

MALONE: "You want to get Capone? What are you prepared to do?"

 

[Coyote]

I used to think Ryan had a brain. That was some time ago. His comments on the birthright matter only serve to cement my opinion.

Everyone knows, including Trump, that he cannot erase the matter with a mere Executive Order. He can however steer the matter into the judicial system and into the Supreme Court.

Or get congress to bring up the issue in session, and then either write a new law amending the 14th or being a turncoat and push for more illegal anchor babies, which would be a death wish for Paul.

How many votes are needed for a constitutional amendment?

Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution, the nation's frame of government, may be altered. Altering the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments and subsequent ratification. Amendments may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a convention of states called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures. To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either—as determined by Congress—the legislatures of three-quarters of the states or state ratifying conventions in three-quarters of the states. The vote of each state (to either ratify or reject a proposed amendment) carries equal weight, regardless of a state's population or length of time in the Union.

I used to think Ryan had a brain. That was some time ago. His comments on the birthright matter only serve to cement my opinion.

Everyone knows, including Trump, that he cannot erase the matter with a mere Executive Order. He can however steer the matter into the judicial system and into the Supreme Court.

Or get congress to bring up the issue in session, and then either write a new law amending the 14th or being a turncoat and push for more illegal anchor babies, which would be a death wish for Paul.

How many votes are needed for a constitutional amendment?

Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution, the nation's frame of government, may be altered. Altering the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments and subsequent ratification. Amendments may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a convention of states called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures. To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either—as determined by Congress—the legislatures of three-quarters of the states or state ratifying conventions in three-quarters of the states. The vote of each state (to either ratify or reject a proposed amendment) carries equal weight, regardless of a state's population or length of time in the Union.

And most amendments fail...interesting selection of failures...

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Bottom line is they keep coming, you must ask why do they risk coming all the way to USA?
   
2. Why leave everything you've ever known your families, you traditions, your houses, your schools, your cities, your life styles and come to America, our America, where you want to sneak in here illegally.
3. I wonder why they keep coming and coming must be a reason right?
4. Can we continue to harbor so many illegals, signing up for our social services?
5. Is it even fair to think we should?
6. What if we did the same to their countries?
   
7. We have a lot of injustice here in America, but come on do we owe these nations a cushy ride?
8. I think not we need to focus in other areas, but these illegal hords are sucking our resources dry.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[Care4all]

except diplomats who are under the jurisdiction of their own country, children born on our soil, are US Citizens.

The 14th amendment could have easily stated those born of citizens or those born of only legal residents, or mentioned this was for newly freed slaves only....

BUT IT DIDN'T.....

It stated all children born, on our soil, under our jurisdiction, are citizens.... foreign diplomats are NOT under our jurisdiction, so THEIR CHILDREN are not US Citizens... diplomats are not under our jurisdiction, they have Diplomatic Immunity in the USA.

It was important in the 14th that ALL under our jurisdiction born on our soil to be included, because we had millions born on our soil with Scottish, and Irish, and Italian decent etc....that were not US citizens themselves....

or even here legally

and if the 14th were interpreted in any other way than what it was, the children of all of those white immigrants, would lose their citizenship.... and America was trying to POPULATE the nation and get more Europeans to immigrate here... and the one way we did this, was by making the citizenship of their children easy, through jus soli citizenship.

https://www.history.com/news/birthright-citizenship-history-united-states

The executive order or a new law by congress to change the 14th amendment would be challenged immediately as being unconstitutional... and would make it to the Supreme court on that challenge, for the Supreme court to re-evaluate, but I see no way the Supreme court could rule any differently that they have previously on the decision of what the 14th amendment meant....

and it would still need an amendment to the constitution to change it.

Well, it's our country. We can do what we want.

Just watch.

Sure we can, but it will take a Constitutional Amendment to do it... there is a procedure in law, on how to handle it... and an executive order, aint it.... nor is a law from congress to replace an amendment in the Constitution legal.

God Bless the Constitution, that a simple law, can NOT tear it apart!!!!

Indeed, but on the border it's a national security issue, mandated by the Constitution and not bound by Posse Comitatus.

MALONE: "You want to get Capone? What are you prepared to do?"

Why is it a National security issue?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I used to think Ryan had a brain. That was some time ago. His comments on the birthright matter only serve to cement my opinion.

Everyone knows, including Trump, that he cannot erase the matter with a mere Executive Order. He can however steer the matter into the judicial system and into the Supreme Court.

Or get congress to bring up the issue in session, and then either write a new law amending the 14th or being a turncoat and push for more illegal anchor babies, which would be a death wish for Paul.

How many votes are needed for a constitutional amendment?

Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution, the nation's frame of government, may be altered. Altering the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments and subsequent ratification. Amendments may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a convention of states called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures. To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either—as determined by Congress—the legislatures of three-quarters of the states or state ratifying conventions in three-quarters of the states. The vote of each state (to either ratify or reject a proposed amendment) carries equal weight, regardless of a state's population or length of time in the Union.

I used to think Ryan had a brain. That was some time ago. His comments on the birthright matter only serve to cement my opinion.

Everyone knows, including Trump, that he cannot erase the matter with a mere Executive Order. He can however steer the matter into the judicial system and into the Supreme Court.

Or get congress to bring up the issue in session, and then either write a new law amending the 14th or being a turncoat and push for more illegal anchor babies, which would be a death wish for Paul.

How many votes are needed for a constitutional amendment?

Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution, the nation's frame of government, may be altered. Altering the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments and subsequent ratification. Amendments may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a convention of states called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures. To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either—as determined by Congress—the legislatures of three-quarters of the states or state ratifying conventions in three-quarters of the states. The vote of each state (to either ratify or reject a proposed amendment) carries equal weight, regardless of a state's population or length of time in the Union.

And most amendments fail...interesting selection of failures...

And a good thing.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

except diplomats who are under the jurisdiction of their own country, children born on our soil, are US Citizens.

The 14th amendment could have easily stated those born of citizens or those born of only legal residents, or mentioned this was for newly freed slaves only....

BUT IT DIDN'T.....

It stated all children born, on our soil, under our jurisdiction, are citizens.... foreign diplomats are NOT under our jurisdiction, so THEIR CHILDREN are not US Citizens... diplomats are not under our jurisdiction, they have Diplomatic Immunity in the USA.

It was important in the 14th that ALL under our jurisdiction born on our soil to be included, because we had millions born on our soil with Scottish, and Irish, and Italian decent etc....that were not US citizens themselves....

or even here legally

and if the 14th were interpreted in any other way than what it was, the children of all of those white immigrants, would lose their citizenship.... and America was trying to POPULATE the nation and get more Europeans to immigrate here... and the one way we did this, was by making the citizenship of their children easy, through jus soli citizenship.

https://www.history.com/news/birthright-citizenship-history-united-states

The executive order or a new law by congress to change the 14th amendment would be challenged immediately as being unconstitutional... and would make it to the Supreme court on that challenge, for the Supreme court to re-evaluate, but I see no way the Supreme court could rule any differently that they have previously on the decision of what the 14th amendment meant....

and it would still need an amendment to the constitution to change it.

Well, it's our country. We can do what we want.

Just watch.

Sure we can, but it will take a Constitutional Amendment to do it... there is a procedure in law, on how to handle it... and an executive order, aint it.... nor is a law from congress to replace an amendment in the Constitution legal.

God Bless the Constitution, that a simple law, can NOT tear it apart!!!!

Indeed, but on the border it's a national security issue, mandated by the Constitution and not bound by Posse Comitatus.

MALONE: "You want to get Capone? What are you prepared to do?"

Why is it a National security issue?

Read the Constitution, and you'll know.

 

[Coyote]

Breaking: SCOTUS rules the 14th amendment does not grant citizenship to illegals, liberals butthurt.

I could care less about the 14th:

Obviously. You people don't care about any of it.

That's why Americans have become so dreadfully cross with you.

You cut the full quote:

I said I care about SHIT STAIN TRUMP being truthful; which he is nothing more than a SHIT STAIN LIAR.

I also said I care about policy aka the CORRECT PROCEDURE to remedy an Amendment, if so desired.

You cut off my quote because you are a coward *****. GO FYS

No, I cut off the quote, but left the gist of your message, as your numbered points are puerile at best.

Here's your full quote -

I could care less about the 14th: What I do care is about
(1) truth = Trump doesn't have that
(2) policy = Trump doesn't know what that means AFA the concept of changing any part of any Amendment
(3) having a POTUS with a brain that doesn't look stupid = Trump has no brain & he looks & sounds stupid

puerile? LOL

no, that is Trump; he thinks the 14th Amendment can be EOed.

That stupid sack-O-shit didn't even pass 5th grade civics class, obviously.

He was out fvcking Kathy in her ass, under the bleachers instead.

Geez...can you tone down the idoicy a tad?

Yes, I doubt Trump knows much about civics or cares. The rest is just stupid.

 

[Coyote]

I used to think Ryan had a brain. That was some time ago. His comments on the birthright matter only serve to cement my opinion.

Everyone knows, including Trump, that he cannot erase the matter with a mere Executive Order. He can however steer the matter into the judicial system and into the Supreme Court.

Or get congress to bring up the issue in session, and then either write a new law amending the 14th or being a turncoat and push for more illegal anchor babies, which would be a death wish for Paul.

How many votes are needed for a constitutional amendment?

Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution, the nation's frame of government, may be altered. Altering the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments and subsequent ratification. Amendments may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a convention of states called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures. To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either—as determined by Congress—the legislatures of three-quarters of the states or state ratifying conventions in three-quarters of the states. The vote of each state (to either ratify or reject a proposed amendment) carries equal weight, regardless of a state's population or length of time in the Union.

I used to think Ryan had a brain. That was some time ago. His comments on the birthright matter only serve to cement my opinion.

Everyone knows, including Trump, that he cannot erase the matter with a mere Executive Order. He can however steer the matter into the judicial system and into the Supreme Court.

Or get congress to bring up the issue in session, and then either write a new law amending the 14th or being a turncoat and push for more illegal anchor babies, which would be a death wish for Paul.

How many votes are needed for a constitutional amendment?

Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution, the nation's frame of government, may be altered. Altering the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments and subsequent ratification. Amendments may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a convention of states called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures. To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either—as determined by Congress—the legislatures of three-quarters of the states or state ratifying conventions in three-quarters of the states. The vote of each state (to either ratify or reject a proposed amendment) carries equal weight, regardless of a state's population or length of time in the Union.

And most amendments fail...interesting selection of failures...

And a good thing.

Totally agree...I think one of the reasons our Constitution has endured (unlike many other countries) is it is HARD to amend, so it can't be done frivously or in partisanly.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I used to think Ryan had a brain. That was some time ago. His comments on the birthright matter only serve to cement my opinion.

Everyone knows, including Trump, that he cannot erase the matter with a mere Executive Order. He can however steer the matter into the judicial system and into the Supreme Court.

Or get congress to bring up the issue in session, and then either write a new law amending the 14th or being a turncoat and push for more illegal anchor babies, which would be a death wish for Paul.

Yes, conservatives are truly this ignorant.

 

[Care4all]

except diplomats who are under the jurisdiction of their own country, children born on our soil, are US Citizens.

The 14th amendment could have easily stated those born of citizens or those born of only legal residents, or mentioned this was for newly freed slaves only....

BUT IT DIDN'T.....

It stated all children born, on our soil, under our jurisdiction, are citizens.... foreign diplomats are NOT under our jurisdiction, so THEIR CHILDREN are not US Citizens... diplomats are not under our jurisdiction, they have Diplomatic Immunity in the USA.

It was important in the 14th that ALL under our jurisdiction born on our soil to be included, because we had millions born on our soil with Scottish, and Irish, and Italian decent etc....that were not US citizens themselves....

or even here legally

and if the 14th were interpreted in any other way than what it was, the children of all of those white immigrants, would lose their citizenship.... and America was trying to POPULATE the nation and get more Europeans to immigrate here... and the one way we did this, was by making the citizenship of their children easy, through jus soli citizenship.

https://www.history.com/news/birthright-citizenship-history-united-states

The executive order or a new law by congress to change the 14th amendment would be challenged immediately as being unconstitutional... and would make it to the Supreme court on that challenge, for the Supreme court to re-evaluate, but I see no way the Supreme court could rule any differently that they have previously on the decision of what the 14th amendment meant....

and it would still need an amendment to the constitution to change it.

Well, it's our country. We can do what we want.

Just watch.

Sure we can, but it will take a Constitutional Amendment to do it... there is a procedure in law, on how to handle it... and an executive order, aint it.... nor is a law from congress to replace an amendment in the Constitution legal.

God Bless the Constitution, that a simple law, can NOT tear it apart!!!!

Indeed, but on the border it's a national security issue, mandated by the Constitution and not bound by Posse Comitatus.

MALONE: "You want to get Capone? What are you prepared to do?"

Why is it a National security issue?

Read the Constitution, and you'll know.

i've read it more than a handful of times....

what part are you referring to with your comment?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Well, it's our country. We can do what we want.

Just watch.

Sure we can, but it will take a Constitutional Amendment to do it... there is a procedure in law, on how to handle it... and an executive order, aint it.... nor is a law from congress to replace an amendment in the Constitution legal.

God Bless the Constitution, that a simple law, can NOT tear it apart!!!!

Indeed, but on the border it's a national security issue, mandated by the Constitution and not bound by Posse Comitatus.

MALONE: "You want to get Capone? What are you prepared to do?"

Why is it a National security issue?

Read the Constitution, and you'll know.

i've read it more than a handful of times....

what part are you referring to with your comment?

Read it again and find out. Apparently you missed a lot. Make notes.