Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Who has constitutional rights?
- Thread starter WEATHER53
- Start date
PeterPilot
Diamond Member
- Jan 17, 2023
- 1,338
- 926
- 1,938
Nice dodge Surada.It means US law prevails in the US. No other country's laws apply. That's "jurisdiction".
Libby von H
Platinum Member
- Nov 10, 2023
- 2,830
- 1,344
- 893
14th Amendment Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United StatesI havent seen one reference to persons of the USA,, can you show where it says that??
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 59,784
- 36,489
- 2,615
thats for application not who gets them,,14th Amendment Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States
each one is specific to whom they apply,, and none of those have been repealed,,
The way the Constitution protects individual rights is by preventing government from violating them. Protected rights are limitations on government, not grants of special privilege to specific people. If it's established, for example, that government is prohibited from violating freedom of speech, it's prohibited from violating anyone's freedom of speech.
So to answer the topic question directly, everyone has Constitutional rights.
So to answer the topic question directly, everyone has Constitutional rights.
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 59,784
- 36,489
- 2,615
sounds about right,,The way the Constitution protects individual rights is by preventing government from violating them. Protected rights are limitations on government, not grants of special privilege to specific people. If it's established, for example, that government is prohibited from violating freedom of speech, it's prohibited from violating anyone's freedom of speech.
So to answer the topic question directly, everyone has Constitutional rights.
just wondering about the 2nd A,,
who are the people to which if refers??
I already know just staring a conversation for others benefit,,
Monk-Eye
Gold Member
- Feb 3, 2018
- 3,229
- 793
- 140
" Political Science Ignorance Of First Principles Conceives Traitorous Innuendo Against Us Republic "
* Over Simplified Explanation By Conspirators For Eighteen Years Of Social Subsistence *
The " an assertion for a simpleton " claims that the term jurisdiction is the only relevant term for consideration from the phrase ' and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " , as if the singular term jurisdiction stands alone , as a summation of all included meaning for the entire phrase , as if the term " thereof " does not include a connotation .
The clause of contention is not " and subject to its jurisdiction " , though that clause would be analogous with " an assertion for a simpleton " where the clause " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " can simply ignore connotations for the term " thereof " .
The term " thereof " adds an addendum - a caveat that stipulates a contractual obligation exists between etas unis and those whom are subjects of its jurisdiction - Who has constitutional rights? , whom are its individual citizens and those whom are subjects by title in us legal immigration system as established through diplomacy .
An intention to deprive us citizens of privileges and solvency for autonomy over its own self governance is traitorous and a persistent issue for concern .
A particular characteristic of propagandists often includes dissociating motivation from validity .
* Over Simplified Explanation By Conspirators For Eighteen Years Of Social Subsistence *
The clause of contention includes the combined term " thereof " , as in " there " and " of " , as in " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " from us 14th amendment , which includes a caveat to " an assertion for a simpleton " ,It means US law prevails in the US. No other country's laws apply. That's "jurisdiction".
The " an assertion for a simpleton " claims that the term jurisdiction is the only relevant term for consideration from the phrase ' and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " , as if the singular term jurisdiction stands alone , as a summation of all included meaning for the entire phrase , as if the term " thereof " does not include a connotation .
The clause of contention is not " and subject to its jurisdiction " , though that clause would be analogous with " an assertion for a simpleton " where the clause " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " can simply ignore connotations for the term " thereof " .
The term " thereof " adds an addendum - a caveat that stipulates a contractual obligation exists between etas unis and those whom are subjects of its jurisdiction - Who has constitutional rights? , whom are its individual citizens and those whom are subjects by title in us legal immigration system as established through diplomacy .
An intention to deprive us citizens of privileges and solvency for autonomy over its own self governance is traitorous and a persistent issue for concern .
A particular characteristic of propagandists often includes dissociating motivation from validity .
Last edited:
Nice dodge Surada.
You should probably read title 8 of the US code on citizenship. The US has jurisdiction on US soil.
8 U.S. Code § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth
Monk-Eye
Gold Member
- Feb 3, 2018
- 3,229
- 793
- 140
" 1996 Welfare Reform Act To Stop Generational Welfare Undermined By Illegal Immigration "
* Brood Parasitism And Theistic Humanism Chastity Communists *
The first statement ( a ) does not specify that " a person born in the United States " is to receive citizenship , for if it did then contention about whether children of illegal migrants are to receive jus soli or jus sanguinin citizenship would be mute , as jus soli would be defacto .
The clause " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " is appended to " a person born in the United States " and consequential meaning can be supposed and perceived for the additional phrase .
The term " thereof " from the phrase " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " imbues exclusivity for subjects of us jurisdiction , which includes citizens and subjects by title in us legal immigration system by visa .
The first principles of political science include an expectation for solvency of us republic and for autonomy by us citizens that includes safeguarding the value of us citizenship , which does not includes providing 18 years of social subsistence to children born by a flood of illegal migrants helping themselves to us taxpayer funds and satisfied with motivations to recreate the over extended carrying capacity and deleterious environment which motivated them to flee .
Stop making a latin american problem a united states problem and make latin america handle its own problems !
The sixth phrase ( f ) does not supersede " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " clause from statement ( a ) that such an individual would also have to have been born of a parent whom was a subject of us jurisdiction and not simply any individual subject to us jurisdiction .
www.law.cornell.edu
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a)
a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b)
a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c)
a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d)
a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e)
a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
(f)
a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
(g)
a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person (A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or (B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h)
a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.
(June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title III, ch. 1, § 301, 66 Stat. 235; Pub. L. 89–770, Nov. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 1322; Pub. L. 92–584, §§ 1, 3, Oct. 27, 1972, 86 Stat. 1289; Pub. L. 95–432, §§ 1, 3, Oct. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 1046; Pub. L. 99–653, § 12, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3657; Pub. L. 103–416, title I, § 101(a), Oct. 25, 1994, 108 Stat. 4306.)
* Brood Parasitism And Theistic Humanism Chastity Communists *
The code does not include a direct statement to confirm an indirect inference that " The US has jurisdiction on US soil. " is a summation that jus soli citizenship is defacto .You should probably read title 8 of the US code on citizenship. The US has jurisdiction on US soil.
8 U.S. Code § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth
The first statement ( a ) does not specify that " a person born in the United States " is to receive citizenship , for if it did then contention about whether children of illegal migrants are to receive jus soli or jus sanguinin citizenship would be mute , as jus soli would be defacto .
The clause " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " is appended to " a person born in the United States " and consequential meaning can be supposed and perceived for the additional phrase .
The term " thereof " from the phrase " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " imbues exclusivity for subjects of us jurisdiction , which includes citizens and subjects by title in us legal immigration system by visa .
The first principles of political science include an expectation for solvency of us republic and for autonomy by us citizens that includes safeguarding the value of us citizenship , which does not includes providing 18 years of social subsistence to children born by a flood of illegal migrants helping themselves to us taxpayer funds and satisfied with motivations to recreate the over extended carrying capacity and deleterious environment which motivated them to flee .
Stop making a latin american problem a united states problem and make latin america handle its own problems !
The sixth phrase ( f ) does not supersede " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " clause from statement ( a ) that such an individual would also have to have been born of a parent whom was a subject of us jurisdiction and not simply any individual subject to us jurisdiction .
8 U.S. Code § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth
(a)
a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b)
a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c)
a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d)
a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e)
a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
(f)
a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
(g)
a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person (A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or (B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h)
a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.
(June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title III, ch. 1, § 301, 66 Stat. 235; Pub. L. 89–770, Nov. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 1322; Pub. L. 92–584, §§ 1, 3, Oct. 27, 1972, 86 Stat. 1289; Pub. L. 95–432, §§ 1, 3, Oct. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 1046; Pub. L. 99–653, § 12, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3657; Pub. L. 103–416, title I, § 101(a), Oct. 25, 1994, 108 Stat. 4306.)
Last edited:
woodwork201
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2021
- 4,631
- 2,839
- 1,938
I just checked my Constitution and it doesn't have the word, "enhanced". Can you post a copy of yours? I clearly need to get mine updated.Illegals?
Nope
They have legal rights but not the benefit of enhanced constitutional rights
That is reserved for citizens.
woodwork201
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2021
- 4,631
- 2,839
- 1,938
Here's some interesting reading on this topic.
" 1996 Welfare Reform Act To Stop Generational Welfare Undermined By Illegal Immigration "
* Brood Parasitism And Theistic Humanism Chastity Communists *
The code does not include a direct statement to confirm an indirect inference that " The US has jurisdiction on US soil. " is a summation that jus soli citizenship is defacto .
The first statement ( a ) does not specify that " a person born in the United States " is to receive citizenship , for if it did then contention about whether children of illegal migrants are to receive jus soli or jus sanguinin citizenship would be mute , as jus soli would be defacto .
The clause " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " is appended to " a person born in the United States " and consequential meaning can be supposed and perceived for the additional phrase .
The term " thereof " from the phrase " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " imbues exclusivity for subjects of us jurisdiction , which includes citizens and subjects by title in us legal immigration system by visa .
The first principles of political science include an expectation for solvency of us republic and for autonomy by us citizens that includes safeguarding the value of us citizenship , which does not includes providing 18 years of social subsistence to children born by a flood of illegal migrants helping themselves to us taxpayer funds and satisfied with motivations to recreate the over extended carrying capacity and deleterious environment which motivated them to flee .
Stop making a latin american problem a united states problem and make latin america handle its own problems !
The sixth phrase ( f ) does not supersede " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " clause from statement ( a ) that such an individual would also have to have been born of a parent whom was a subject of us jurisdiction and not simply any individual subject to us jurisdiction .
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:8 U.S. Code § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth
(a)
a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b)
a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c)
a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d)
a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e)
a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
(f)
a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
(g)
a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person (A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or (B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h)
a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.
(June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title III, ch. 1, § 301, 66 Stat. 235; Pub. L. 89–770, Nov. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 1322; Pub. L. 92–584, §§ 1, 3, Oct. 27, 1972, 86 Stat. 1289; Pub. L. 95–432, §§ 1, 3, Oct. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 1046; Pub. L. 99–653, § 12, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3657; Pub. L. 103–416, title I, § 101(a), Oct. 25, 1994, 108 Stat. 4306.)
Look up the meaning of jurisdiction in LAW.
No
Not if illegally here. Now they have to be handled legally but right to vote and received monetary benefits of immigrants or citizens had not been codified yet although lib loons are pushing mightly
woodwork201
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2021
- 4,631
- 2,839
- 1,938
14th Amendment was drafted, the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” had a settled meaning: It referred to a person who was subject to U.S. law
I never thought I'd be agreeing with you but here it is. For a guy who's so far left, you're right.
woodwork201
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2021
- 4,631
- 2,839
- 1,938
If you are going to support the Constitution, it means nothing unless you also defend it when it is in support of those you hate the most.
Do you think that the police can go up to any illegal alien that they suspect of a crime and execute them? They have no right to a trial, no right to an attorney? No protection against cruel and unusual punishment. If anyone in the Government thinks they're guilty then shoot them. Or stake them and then give them 100 lashes with a bullwhip. We could be like Hamas and rape the women for crossing the border because, you know, they're criminals and don't have rights. Cruel and unusual punishment is OK.
If they object to any of that, of course, it's 20 years in the penitentiary. No jury, no lawyer, no trial. Not only are they aliens, they're criminals and, as we all know, criminals don't have rights either. The fact that all of these punishments can be applied to convicted jaywalkers, too, because criminals have no rights either but that's a discussion for a different thread.
Do you think that the police can go up to any illegal alien that they suspect of a crime and execute them? They have no right to a trial, no right to an attorney? No protection against cruel and unusual punishment. If anyone in the Government thinks they're guilty then shoot them. Or stake them and then give them 100 lashes with a bullwhip. We could be like Hamas and rape the women for crossing the border because, you know, they're criminals and don't have rights. Cruel and unusual punishment is OK.
If they object to any of that, of course, it's 20 years in the penitentiary. No jury, no lawyer, no trial. Not only are they aliens, they're criminals and, as we all know, criminals don't have rights either. The fact that all of these punishments can be applied to convicted jaywalkers, too, because criminals have no rights either but that's a discussion for a different thread.
Monk-Eye
Gold Member
- Feb 3, 2018
- 3,229
- 793
- 140
" Subverting Us Solvency "
* Revilers Of Us Citizenship *
Is there a difference between " subject to " and " subject of " a jurisdiction ?
* Revilers Of Us Citizenship *
The 14th amendment doe not have a settled meaning and one of the relevant issues in kim wong ark case was that the parents were legal migrants in good standing ; illegal migrants are neither .14th Amendment was drafted, the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” had a settled meaning: It referred to a person who was subject to U.S. law
Is there a difference between " subject to " and " subject of " a jurisdiction ?
Monk-Eye
Gold Member
- Feb 3, 2018
- 3,229
- 793
- 140
" Nuances Of Us 14th Amendment Omitted In Yearn Interpretation "
* Obvious Limits Of Responsibility And Civics *
Negative liberties represent protections , independence and individualism .
Positive liberties represent endowments , dependence and collectivism .
usmessageboard.com
* Us Solvency And Us Citizen Sovereignty Entitled Without Question *
Us citizenship is a positive liberty of endowment that includes a contingency that those becoming us citizens by birth must be born of individuals whom are subjects of us jurisdiction and not simply subject to it that is imbued within the clause " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " .
Whether one wishes to contest that the term " thereof " , which is added to the phrase " and subject to the jurisdiction " , means that those born must have been born to those whom are " subjects of us jurisdiction " becomes irrelevant given how the extension of citizenship should be implemented , so thate solvency of etas unis and sovereignty of its citizens is provided .
* Moral Relativism Within Nature Versus Altruistic Idealism *
The first principles of naturalism and political science indicate that prior to the existence of a social civil contract according to a constitution , each individual is subject to the moral relativism within nature and to improve an opportunity for survival and quality of life natural freedoms are exchanged for protected rites of behavior , which are enforced posthumously through retort .
At its inception a state is comprised of citizens , whom are subjects of a state on whose behalf interests of a state lay , while non citizens are not subjects of a state and remain subject to natural freedoms and moral relativism within nature ; and , those first principles of naturalism and political science continue to exist in history .
* Obvious Limits Of Responsibility And Civics *
First and foremost is that us constitution is expected to provide solvency for us states and sovereignty for us citizens and that includes competent decisions when extending citizenship .If you are going to support the Constitution, it means nothing unless you also defend it when it is in support of those you hate the most.
Negative liberties represent protections , independence and individualism .
Positive liberties represent endowments , dependence and collectivism .
Political Science Terminology : Negative / Positive : Wrights / Liberties : Protections / Endowments
" Political Science Terminology : Negative / Positive : Wrights / Liberties : Protections / Endowments " * Express Agreement Or Disagreement With These Premises * Does any agree or disagree that " equal wrights " advocates must make a distinction between negative and positive wrights ? Does...
usmessageboard.com
* Us Solvency And Us Citizen Sovereignty Entitled Without Question *
The us 14th amendment has extended equal protection of its laws , however there is a difference between negative liberty of protections and positive liberty of endowments , and those whom are not subjects of us jurisdiction are not entitled to positive liberty of endowments .Do you think that the police can go up to any illegal alien that they suspect of a crime and execute them? They have no right to a trial, no right to an attorney? No protection against cruel and unusual punishment. If anyone in the Government thinks they're guilty then shoot them. Or stake them and then give them 100 lashes with a bullwhip. We could be like Hamas and rape the women for crossing the border because, you know, they're criminals and don't have rights. Cruel and unusual punishment is OK.
Us citizenship is a positive liberty of endowment that includes a contingency that those becoming us citizens by birth must be born of individuals whom are subjects of us jurisdiction and not simply subject to it that is imbued within the clause " and subject to the jurisdiction thereof " .
Whether one wishes to contest that the term " thereof " , which is added to the phrase " and subject to the jurisdiction " , means that those born must have been born to those whom are " subjects of us jurisdiction " becomes irrelevant given how the extension of citizenship should be implemented , so thate solvency of etas unis and sovereignty of its citizens is provided .
* Moral Relativism Within Nature Versus Altruistic Idealism *
First principle of naturalism and political science are not dismissed because of misconstrued interpretations of us 14th amendment .If they object to any of that, of course, it's 20 years in the penitentiary. No jury, no lawyer, no trial. Not only are they aliens, they're criminals and, as we all know, criminals don't have rights either. The fact that all of these punishments can be applied to convicted jaywalkers, too, because criminals have no rights either but that's a discussion for a different thread.
The first principles of naturalism and political science indicate that prior to the existence of a social civil contract according to a constitution , each individual is subject to the moral relativism within nature and to improve an opportunity for survival and quality of life natural freedoms are exchanged for protected rites of behavior , which are enforced posthumously through retort .
At its inception a state is comprised of citizens , whom are subjects of a state on whose behalf interests of a state lay , while non citizens are not subjects of a state and remain subject to natural freedoms and moral relativism within nature ; and , those first principles of naturalism and political science continue to exist in history .
The concept of "positive liberty" is a deliberate mutilation of "liberty". A positive liberty isn't a liberty at all, it's a claim on the service of others. It's a violation of liberty.Negative liberties represent protections , independence and individualism .
Positive liberties represent endowments , dependence and collectivism .
San Souci
Diamond Member
- Feb 4, 2020
- 5,854
- 4,604
- 1,940
Not under Democrats. Illegals have MORE Rights than Citizens.Illegals?
Nope
They have legal rights but not the benefit of enhanced constitutional rights
That is reserved for citizens.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 67
- Views
- 484
- Replies
- 8
- Views
- 167
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 2
- Views
- 5
- Replies
- 20
- Views
- 95
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8061
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 470
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-