Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
However, having a tiny amount of empathy, and experience living near the border. I don't blame her for trying to get out of a corrupt country with crappy conditions that we help create. We create the drug market and exploit mexico for cheap vacations. Who do you think pays the price for that??
Looking again for the middle ground. Perhaps if we want to shame these people and chase them out with pitchforks, maybe we should correct some of the problems we have a hand in creating in Latin America.............
Who's "we"? I refuse to accept the violation of our borders and have my livelyhood downgraded by illegal immigration just because of things our government has done that didn't require my vote. We aren't the only country in the world who uses and buys illegal drugs. At any rate, the supplier is just as guilty as the user.
Please provide a link where we are getting cheap vacations to Mexico more than we are getting from any other country. What does that have to do with illegal immigration anyway? All countries offer deals to visiting foreigners to increase their tourist dollars.
Other than our government (not "we) not security our borders and enforcing our immigration laws as they should have just how did our government create problems for Mexico? Sorry, but it is their leaders that are to blame for their internal and economic problems. Put the blame where the blame belongs. I swear the list of ridiculous excuses for immigration violaters gets crazier every day.
All children born here, even of foreign nationals are citizens. It does not exclude those whose parents are here illegally.
You might wish to rethink the WKA vs US claim (I already stated: WKA does not grant BRC to illegal born children, Sick of the "sob" stories...), in fact you can search it in city data as I have already demolished that supposed claim. WKA specifically states
Quote:
The evident intention, and the necessary effect, of the submission of this case to the decision of the court upon the facts agreed by the parties were to present for determination the single question stated at the beginning of this opinion, namely, whether a child born in the United States, of parent of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States. For the reasons above stated, this court is of opinion that the question must be answered in the affirmative.
and then the grand finale
Quote:
The question presented by the record is whether a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States by virtue of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.
this is defined in Gray’s opinion with
Quote:
Chinese persons, born out of the United States, remaining subjects of the Emperor of China, and not having become citizens of the United States, are entitled to the protection of, and owe allegiance to, the United States so long as they are permitted by the United States to reside here, and are " subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the same sense as all other aliens residing in the United States.
Now, please explain where illegals are allowed a permanent domicile (they aren't even recognized as residents of any state) and where they have been permitted by the US Gov't to reside here. (NOTE: you can't). WKA is very limiting in its decision, you see, ones parents must be here legally for the child to be born an citizen.
Last edited by Liquid Reigns; 08-04-2012 at 04:28 PM..
I suppose if we wanted to be precise it'd be a Federation of Constitutional Democratic Republics. Plus our several colonies that have varying degrees of autonomy but are ultimately not granted the full rights of the homeland. Mind you, we're not supposed to bring up the issue of our colonies because it makes some people uncomfortable to think we're an imperial power, so we use different names to refer to them such as insular areas, commonwealths, or associated nations.
Federal Republic for short.
To be precise we are a Federal Constitutional Republic. Love the word games.
At no point are our States any type of Federation of Constitutional Democratic Republics. All States are there own semi-sovereign Constitutional Republics. The States are not their own countries, thus they can not be Democratic Republics. The States were created by the Federal Gov't, thus they are Federated States of the Constitutional Republic.
Just because some of our elections are held through a democratic process, that does not make the States or the US any type of Democratic Republic.
Speak for yourself. My BIL was here illegally once his visa expired and while waiting for his green card.
His "anchors", my AMERICAN citizen nieces, would disagree with the idea thr there father wasn't welcome here.
Are you trying to say your BIL failed to file his CoS prior to his visa expiring? Or did he file for his CoS in time and you assume he was illegally present while waiting for his new status? What you have written leaves a lot to be desired.
You might wish to rethink the WKA vs US claim (I already stated: WKA does not grant BRC to illegal born children, Sick of the "sob" stories...), in fact you can search it in city data as I have already demolished that supposed claim. WKA specifically states and then the grand finale this is defined in Gray’s opinion withNow, please explain where illegals are allowed a permanent domicile (they aren't even recognized as residents of any state) and where they have been permitted by the US Gov't to reside here. (NOTE: you can't). WKA is very limiting in its decision, you see, ones parents must be here legally for the child to be born an citizen.
Nice try. But it does not say their PARENTS have to be here legally. It says they have to live her full time.
And don't even try to pretend SCOTUS was referring to permanent residency as an immigration status, since it didn't exist at the time. The parents just need to have a home here, be employed here, and not in their home country. All easily met. Which is why every state in this nation and SCOTUS recognize that being born here, makes you a citizen.
Are you trying to say your BIL failed to file his CoS prior to his visa expiring? Or did he file for his CoS in time and you assume he was illegally present while waiting for his new status? What you have written leaves a lot to be desired.
His visa expired before he married my sister. He waited for the marriage to file a change of status.
The above story is about an illegal immigrant...yes, illegal...with two anchor babies...This "poor" woman was selling tamales to "feed" her children. Not buying that for a nanosecond! I bet those kids were getting food stamps, and the Mama, was using that money to buy ingredients for her tamales, which she was selling, illegally...after all, she has already broken one law, why not break others...no permit, or license...and gee, did anyone look at her kids, Medicaid and EBT account, was the Mother reporting this income? I doubt it...instead, we get the "sob" story...about this poor Mama, being held, and children taken away in a squad car...The news in this country is SO slanted...how about actually writing a news story, that is factual, and objective? Imagine that. And looking at ALL of the issues, rather than the current one sided viewpoint, that is so common now?
Yes, I find it appalling to say the least. The anchor baby rule has got to end. Deport the woman, where is ICE!! I've seen what the illegal's have done to California and Las Vegas. Our local High School is 70% Hispanic and most don't speak a lick of English. It's also interesting that 70% of the students are eligible for the free lunch program. The graduation rate is 66% and this just adds to the dependent class.
Time people earn their keep and save the welfare for the US Citizens that really need it.
Nice try. But it does not say their PARENTS have to be here legally. It says they have to live her full time.
And don't even try to pretend SCOTUS was referring to permanent residency as an immigration status, since it didn't exist at the time. The parents just need to have a home here, be employed here, and not in their home country. All easily met. Which is why every state in this nation and SCOTUS recognize that being born here, makes you a citizen.
Does that mean if a person doesn't live in the U.S. full-time and gives birth on U.S. soil, their children can't be citizens, even if the parents are citizens? Also, if a person is homeless and unemployed, are their children denied citizenship? How are women who don't live or work here entering this country and giving birth to a U.S. citizen (Birth Tourism)? Please explain.
Let's not forget, diplomats and their staff reside here and are employed here. Yet, children they give birth to on U.S. soil are not conferred U.S. citizenship.
The fact remains, the SCOTUS has yet to rule on Birthright Citizenship for the children of illegal aliens. If you disagree, please post the ruling. And, don't post Wong Kim Ark. The parents were not here illegally.
Oh I didn't miss your point, to be reactionary and not particular fluent with the truth. I just think it is a **** poor point to make.
Reactionary? I'm a liberal. I don't think our poor and middle class should be punished to help Mexico's underclass and their oligarchy. How is that reactionary?
Quote:
One, being an illegal alien, means she broke ONE law. The one regarding legal entry into this country. After that, she may have violated a health code, but again, this apparently goes right over your head, those are not laws.
Yeah laws are not laws. Maybe some of us think that the first thing you do when you get here is to obey our laws rather than ignore them? Especially when you want to become part of our society?
Quote:
I would also venture to guess, you have also broken a law or two.
The other guy does is it not an accepted defense. I certainly, like most Americans, would not expect to go overseas, violate that country's laws and demand their citizens look the other way if I did so.
Quote:
As for "baker's dozen", again your ability to make friends with facts is clearly not at play here. The bakers dozen concept is not only not american, it also goes back to the 1200s or so. AND it is not a law. Seriously, go to Dunkin Donuts, ask for a bakers dozen, they will charge you for 13 of their nasty "donuts".
That's the whole point: to avoid fraud. This woman clearly does not believe in food safety laws. Again why are we supposed to be happy she's here, let alone give her permission to ignore our immigration laws?
Quote:
The point I am trying to make, is that this woman did not do anything many other people do not also do daily. And the occasional time those people get in trouble (as this girl did Oregon girl's lemonade stand shut down by health inspector - Seattle News - MyNorthwest.com). People are up in arms about it being unfair. Well it is either unfair for everyone or not. Because otherwise it isn't really about the tamales is it?
So what? Are we supposed to let people out of jails on the grounds that other people break laws? What a massively stupid argument!
Quote:
No the grounds for deportation are......... being here ILLEGALLY.
Not the tamales, or anything else.
The tamales just indicate she's not exactly a law abiding person. Again I have no idea why we're supposed to be sympathetic to her self imposed plight or her desire to skip our immigration laws.
However, having a tiny amount of empathy, and experience living near the border. I don't blame her for trying to get out of a corrupt country with crappy conditions that we help create. We create the drug market and exploit mexico for cheap vacations. Who do you think pays the price for that??
Looking again for the middle ground. Perhaps if we want to shame these people and chase them out with pitchforks, maybe we should correct some of the problems we have a hand in creating in Latin America.............
I personally didn't do any of that. Why should I be punished for it? If she and her fellow Mexicans spent more time demanding things from their own country instead of sneaking into ours maybe their country wouldn't suck so much.
We have no jobs for our own people. We don't owe Mexicans the right to come here under such circumstances, let alone the right to break our employment, immigration and food safety laws.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
WKA is very limiting in its decision, you see, ones parents must be here legally for the child to be born an citizen.
Love the word games. 
