- Apr 11, 2023
- 36,094
- 18,135
- 1,788
No power exists to determine this by legislation or executive order.We don't need an amendment, we need to determine what "subject to the jurisdiction of" means once and for all.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No power exists to determine this by legislation or executive order.We don't need an amendment, we need to determine what "subject to the jurisdiction of" means once and for all.
And President Trump's E.O. TITLED: PROTECTING THE MEANING AND VALUE OF AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP is within his Article 2 powers, allowing him to set new public policy. Remember Biden's open border policy allowing the invasion of the United States? Elections have consequences, and that includes setting new public policy.Only within the confines of law and the constitution.
Let us establish fundamental rules of constitutional law from an accepted voice of authority.
Intent of constitution<SNIP>
<SNIP> "A thing may be within the letter of a statute and not within its meaning, and within its meaning, though not within its letter. The intention of the lawmaker is the law."
According to you, but not according to the court:
Keep in mind United States v. Wong Kim Ark dealt with a child born to lawfully domiciled Chinese parents.
And President Trump's E.O. TITLED: PROTECTING THE MEANING AND VALUE OF AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP is within his Article 2 powers, allowing him to set new public policy. Remember Biden's open border policy allowing the invasion of the United States? Elections have consequences, and that includes setting new public policy.
I'm fine with just going forward and not revoking past citizenships.
Ellis island is how they came....everyone signed in for having a skilled trade. He had papers stuffed into the family Bible Grandma made him buy. (He wasn't exactly happy about its purchase either as the story goes)How do we know they were legal? Can you prove that after all this time? Do you see the problem your position creates?
Ellis island is how they came....everyone signed in for having a skilled trade. He had papers stuffed into the family Bible Grandma made him buy. (He wasn't exactly happy about its purchase either as the story goes)
If they knew the whole truth about my great great grandfather they wouldn't have let him in. (He was something of a drunk)
Today's information age is different from days past. Electronic information is very different.
We know exactly who people are. And most trying to cross illegally are not people we want here for any reason.
Why do you want thieves, drug runners, slavery, and etc to have free reign?
They were not in the country illegally. They did have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States and were carrying on business. Currently, we are talking about illegal entrant foreign nationals.Actually, they weren't "legally domiciled". In fact, they were ineligible to become citizens due ot the Chinese Exclusion Act.
Good for them. My dad was also "trying to find a better life" and legally entered the United States and went through the procedures at Ellis Island and met the requirements for entry.They are just people trying to find a better life, just like my ancestors and your ancestors did.
I am sure the lawsuits are being filed this week if not already.I suspect he knows it will be challenged and he wants a SCOTUS ruling in it.
They are not Mexicans....Again, this was the same shit they said about the Irish, 150 years ago.
The same shit they said about the Italians and Germans 100 years ago.
The same shit they said about the Polish 50 years ago.
Now it's the Mexicans, but they've moved on to other nationalities because less Mexicans are coming over.
Most of the people trying to cross the border are not criminals. They aren't drug runners (not that drugs should be illegal to start with)
They are just people trying to find a better life, just like my ancestors and your ancestors did.
Rooting for America's failure? Not surprised.Okay, so that will be babies born between 2025 and 2029, until the next Democrat overturns this circus.
But I doubt it will even go that far, by the time this winds through the courts, Trump will be hiding in his bunker with a 20% approval rating after he collapses the economy.
So a tourist can commit crimes?Can they? Sure. But it hinges on the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". Diplomats are not . And we all know what happens when the violate a law. Now, if the SC decides that other classes of people within the US are not subject to the jurisdiction, that interpretation will be used in other laws. Short of rewriting the amendment to clarify that the exclusions only refer to that amendment, then any people in the exclusion list would be free to commit crimes.
![]()
Trump DHS repeals key Mayorkas memo limiting ICE agents, orders parole review
The Department of Homeland Security issued two memos late Monday to repeal limits on federal immigration enforcement, and demanding a review on parole use.www.foxnews.com