Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-13-2017, 10:11 AM
 
Location: NE Mississippi
25,575 posts, read 17,286,360 times
Reputation: 37321

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1 View Post
..........


No one on this forum is a constitutional scholar - including yourself.
Uh-Oh.. Someone didn't understand the question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-13-2017, 10:23 AM
 
Location: Billings, MT
9,884 posts, read 10,975,748 times
Reputation: 14180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa View Post
Read it and weep:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The First Amendment does not apply to foreign nationals who have not yet entered the United States.
Whether it, or the rest of the Constitution, applies to citizens of foreign countries within the borders of the United States is still up for debate.
Congress has made no law respecting the establishment of religion, that I know of. If you know of such a law, please reveal it to us.
I have a copy of the Constitution right here on my desk. I read it frequently. I believe the people who wrote it meant what they wrote, and wrote what they meant. Take, for instance, the often referred to "Emoluments Clause". As it applies to the President, it appears in Article II, Section 1, the next to the last paragraph: "...he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States or any of them."
It would seem the writers knew exactly what they wanted to say, and said it!
The OTHER "Emoluments Clause" appears in Article I (which describes the Congress), Section 9, the last paragraph thereof. Since the rest of Article I applies only to the Congress, it seems to be obvious that the last paragraph of Section 9 does, too.

So, sorry, but no weeping on my part. 8 USC 1182, in its entirety, give broad powers to the President (as quoted), and the rest of 1182 gives broad powers over immigration to members of the President's CABINET! (i.e. the Attorney General, the Secretary of State, etc.)
Perhaps you should read the entire law.
Perhaps the law will be declared unconstitutional, but it hasn't happened yet. Until that does happen, the law stands as written.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 10:26 AM
 
5,224 posts, read 3,014,614 times
Reputation: 7022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa View Post
Read it and weep:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


And yet, from what I remember, the Constitution only applies to American citizens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 10:29 AM
 
Location: Los Altos Hills, CA
36,659 posts, read 67,526,972 times
Reputation: 21244
Quote:
Originally Posted by xplosiveallegation View Post
Its time to impeach
It sure is.

Why hasnt that staunch constitutionalist Trey Gowdy called a hearing yet?????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 10:31 AM
 
15,706 posts, read 11,774,139 times
Reputation: 7020
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk55732 View Post
And yet, from what I remember, the Constitution only applies to American citizens.
1) Many of the people affected by the ban are US citizens and green card holders. 2) The Supreme Court has ruled on cases related to Guantanamo that non-citizens are not entirely uncovered by Constitutional protection.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 10:35 AM
 
5,224 posts, read 3,014,614 times
Reputation: 7022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiyero View Post
1) Many of the people affected by the ban are US citizens and green card holders. 2) The Supreme Court has ruled on cases related to Guantanamo that non-citizens are not entirely uncovered by Constitutional protection.
I have heard that there were a few American citizens who were affected. However, that was a small amount and it should have been made to affect them. Green card holders are not American citizens so while it sucks, well, the Constitution should not apply to them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 10:43 AM
 
15,706 posts, read 11,774,139 times
Reputation: 7020
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk55732 View Post
I have heard that there were a few American citizens who were affected. However, that was a small amount and it should have been made to affect them. Green card holders are not American citizens so while it sucks, well, the Constitution should not apply to them.
There were thousands of citizens affected.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 10:43 AM
 
Location: Pacific Beach/San Diego
4,750 posts, read 3,567,077 times
Reputation: 4614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colorado^ View Post
Let's compare. 10-30 million illegals in the US that the liberals want to ingore. Thanks for the LOLs!
Thirty million? Is this going to be the new way that Republicans prove themselves? "That guy thinks he's conservative, but he's a ******* - - he says there's only 30 million illegals in this country. Obviously it's 60 million!"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 10:46 AM
 
46,952 posts, read 25,990,037 times
Reputation: 29442
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk55732 View Post
And yet, from what I remember, the Constitution only applies to American citizens.
Wrongo. The Founders were smart cookies - when they used "person" in some places and "citizen" in others, it wasn't a stylistic choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 10:50 AM
 
17,273 posts, read 9,560,145 times
Reputation: 16468
Quote:
Originally Posted by SandraMoore66 View Post
Were you on vacation for the last 8 years?
Excuse me, but did the White House advisor in the Obama administration EVER say that the president will not be questioned? And you actually support that statement? My god, even more unhinged than I thought.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:14 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top