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.
also add when we were stealing California, Arizona, Nevada and Utah, New Mexico and all of Colorado west of the Continental Divide. All in all the United States helped its self to over a third of the nation called Mexico. To be fair we didn't steal a small strip of land south of the Gila River in Arizona (Gadsen Purdhase) bought to have the future right of way for the Southern Pacific RR.
Excuse me!
From my memory of Texas history, the Mezgins started it with Santa Anna coming up through Texas, kicking ass and taking no names. Remember the Alamo? Well, Sam Houston and his army took care of `ol Santa Anna. For his life, he gave up Texas.
Then you have the Mezgins, starting another war, saying Santa Anna didn't give up the southwest to Texas or the USA.
Steal? pft!
The Mezgins lost and there was no stealing, for kicking the bully in the nuts, and stripping clothes off of him.
Why does no politician or business man ever go after the people who hire illegals? Seems like this would more easily get to the core of the problem.
Where do you get the notion that they don't? Under Bush we had workplace raids. Obama put an end to that. The House GOP just introduced legislation to make e-verify mandate in every workplace. That would stop the employers. Think the Democrats will pass it? Another thing is that presently it is hard to determine if an employer "knowingly" hired illegal aliens because many use authentic looking fake or stolen documents to be hired. E-verify will end all that.
Cannot a simple addendum to the amendment be made that one of the parents has to be a US citizen? Or that this excludes offspring of people who are in the country illegally? I see no reason why the 14th has to be repealed, just some common sense injected into it along with modernizing it a little.
From my memory of Texas history, the Mezgins started it with Santa Anna coming up through Texas, kicking ass and taking no names. Remember the Alamo? Well, Sam Houston and his army took care of `ol Santa Anna. For his life, he gave up Texas.
Then you have the Mezgins, starting another war, saying Santa Anna didn't give up the southwest to Texas or the USA.
Steal? pft!
The Mezgins lost and there was no stealing, for kicking the bully in the nuts, and stripping clothes off of him.
Texas schools must do a **** poor job of teaching Texas history. I hate to inform you The Spanish were walking on Texas soil 300 years before the United States existed and 350 years before any American planted his clod hopper boots into it. Why do you think the most of Texas' rivers have Spanish names like Sabine, San Jacinto, Pecos and Rio Grande del Norte (trans The Great River of the North) . Why are the barrier islands from Galveston are named Matagorda, San Jose and Padre something a Spaniard would do . What good 'Merican would named his settlements, Corpus Christi (trans The Body of Christ), Del Rio, Reynosa, Laredo Matagoras, Amarillo (pronounced Amariyo) San Marcos, San Antonio de Bexar, Ulvade or El Paso del Norte (trans The passage to the North) . Spanish explorers, treasure hunters and missionaries came first in the 15th Century and by 1650 some settlements had taken root.
In 1763 Britain and Spain settled the border between British and Spanish America at the Mississippi River Spain got everything West of it. In 1783 The treaty of Paris settled the boundary between the New USA British and Spanish America at the same boundary recognized 1763 border. In 1810 due to Napoleon conquering Spain and putin a brother on the Throne in Madrid, The people living in the Viceroyalty or New Spain declared their independence and proclaimed a new nation Mexico (named after the Azrec Empire named Mexica). Before Napoleon conquered Spain the Spanish King tried to appease Napoleon by giving Louisiana back to France so the border between Louisiana was chosen by Napoleon to be along the Sabine and Red Rivers. Napoleon not wanting to see the British capture it sold it to The USA in 1803. Mexico was recognized as a independence nation and its northern border set by the Congress of Vienna in 1815 that sorted out Europe after the surrender of Napoleon at Waterloo.
The Mexicans made Tejas one their northern provinces along with Nuevo Mexico and Alto (Upper) California. Mexico's hold on these places was weak for they were far from the District Federal (Mexico City). The Mexican government provided little anything in the way of value or military support but insisted the taxes get paid. Americans from the mid South and South began to go into Texas after those parts of the USA became settled enough to be full states or the 1820s. Mexico was taken over by a military strongman (Caudillo) named Lopez de Santa Ana.
Now we are at the point Texas school text books say Texas history began . I agree recent Johnny come lately Americans and original Tejanos rebelled against Mexico and Lopez de Santa Ana. He chose to use military force to sequre his countries sovereign territory. An act that is fully understandable and would be our nations reaction if recent Mexican settlers or immigrants legal or otherwise decided to rebel and return the US SW California or Texas t The United Sates of Mexico or to create a new nation called Azatlan for The Aztecs migrated from the North to Mexico in the Middle Ages (13th Century).
The Texans won and The New republic and Mexico drew a new Western and southern border for Texas in 1836 and after a short period of liberty became a US state in 1845. The Mexicans didn't recognize this annexation and had other problems with Americans going to California and thinking that this lands was also theirs for the taking. So war broke out again didn't it.
Whether the annexation of the American SW, Texas and California is grand theft of half a million square miles and the resources on it from Mexico by American interlopers or the much nicer myth we like to teach in American schools is a mater of opinion.
I like to think is goes like this you have a nice car or truck in your drive way which I want real bad. I come over one day get in the vehicle and drive it away as if its now mine. You get really POed and come with a gun to get it back if need be by using deadly force. Now I have a very good gun too and thanks to our nice stand your ground law I'll shoot you between the eyes and claim I feared for my life and shot you in self defense. Now when the cops show up to sort this all out I'll convince because I'm a nice white guy them the gun play was in self defense and won't tell them I stole your vehicle which is still parked in my driveway!
Texas schools must do a **** poor job of teaching Texas history. I hate to inform you The Spanish were walking on Texas soil 300 years before the United States existed and 350 years before any American planted his clod hopper boots into it. Why do you think the most of Texas' rivers have Spanish names like Sabine, San Jacinto, Pecos and Rio Grande del Norte (trans The Great River of the North) . Why are the barrier islands from Galveston are named Matagorda, San Jose and Padre something a Spaniard would do . What good 'Merican would named his settlements, Corpus Christi (trans The Body of Christ), Del Rio, Reynosa, Laredo Matagoras, Amarillo (pronounced Amariyo) San Marcos, San Antonio de Bexar, Ulvade or El Paso del Norte (trans The passage to the North) . Spanish explorers, treasure hunters and missionaries came first in the 15th Century and by 1650 some settlements had taken root.
In 1763 Britain and Spain settled the border between British and Spanish America at the Mississippi River Spain got everything West of it. In 1783 The treaty of Paris settled the boundary between the New USA British and Spanish America at the same boundary recognized 1763 border. In 1810 due to Napoleon conquering Spain and putin a brother on the Throne in Madrid, The people living in the Viceroyalty or New Spain declared their independence and proclaimed a new nation Mexico (named after the Azrec Empire named Mexica). Before Napoleon conquered Spain the Spanish King tried to appease Napoleon by giving Louisiana back to France so the border between Louisiana was chosen by Napoleon to be along the Sabine and Red Rivers. Napoleon not wanting to see the British capture it sold it to The USA in 1803. Mexico was recognized as a independence nation and its northern border set by the Congress of Vienna in 1815 that sorted out Europe after the surrender of Napoleon at Waterloo.
The Mexicans made Tejas one their northern provinces along with Nuevo Mexico and Alto (Upper) California. Mexico's hold on these places was weak for they were far from the District Federal (Mexico City). The Mexican government provided little anything in the way of value or military support but insisted the taxes get paid. Americans from the mid South and South began to go into Texas after those parts of the USA became settled enough to be full states or the 1820s. Mexico was taken over by a military strongman (Caudillo) named Lopez de Santa Ana.
Now we are at the point Texas school text books say Texas history began . I agree recent Johnny come lately Americans and original Tejanos rebelled against Mexico and Lopez de Santa Ana. He chose to use military force to sequre his countries sovereign territory. An act that is fully understandable and would be our nations reaction if recent Mexican settlers or immigrants legal or otherwise decided to rebel and return the US SW California or Texas t The United Sates of Mexico or to create a new nation called Azatlan for The Aztecs migrated from the North to Mexico in the Middle Ages (13th Century).
The Texans won and The New republic and Mexico drew a new Western and southern border for Texas in 1836 and after a short period of liberty became a US state in 1845. The Mexicans didn't recognize this annexation and had other problems with Americans going to California and thinking that this lands was also theirs for the taking. So war broke out again didn't it.
Whether the annexation of the American SW, Texas and California is grand theft of half a million square miles and the resources on it from Mexico by American interlopers or the much nicer myth we like to teach in American schools is a mater of opinion.
I like to think is goes like this you have a nice car or truck in your drive way which I want real bad. I come over one day get in the vehicle and drive it away as if its now mine. You get really POed and come with a gun to get it back if need be by using deadly force. Now I have a very good gun too and thanks to our nice stand your ground law I'll shoot you between the eyes and claim I feared for my life and shot you in self defense. Now when the cops show up to sort this all out I'll convince because I'm a nice white guy them the gun play was in self defense and won't tell them I stole your vehicle which is still parked in my driveway!
You forget two very important things and that is that the U.S. paid Mexico for some of the southwest territories by the tune of $15 million and forgave them many debts with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Also, with the Gladson Purchase there were more territories bought and paid for. Now you can make all the claims you want that these deals went down at gunpoint but the U.S. could have just taken them with no monies exchanging hands but they didn't Mexico signed the dotted line. It was a done deal long ago. Throughout history wars have been fought and lands have exchanged hands. Deal with it.
Texas schools must do a **** poor job of teaching Texas history. I hate to inform you The Spanish were walking on Texas soil 300 years before the United States existed and 350 years before any American planted his clod hopper boots into it. Why do you think the most of Texas' rivers have Spanish names like Sabine, San Jacinto, Pecos and Rio Grande del Norte (trans The Great River of the North) . Why are the barrier islands from Galveston are named Matagorda, San Jose and Padre something a Spaniard would do . What good 'Merican would named his settlements, Corpus Christi (trans The Body of Christ), Del Rio, Reynosa, Laredo Matagoras, Amarillo (pronounced Amariyo) San Marcos, San Antonio de Bexar, Ulvade or El Paso del Norte (trans The passage to the North) . Spanish explorers, treasure hunters and missionaries came first in the 15th Century and by 1650 some settlements had taken root.
In 1763 Britain and Spain settled the border between British and Spanish America at the Mississippi River Spain got everything West of it. In 1783 The treaty of Paris settled the boundary between the New USA British and Spanish America at the same boundary recognized 1763 border. In 1810 due to Napoleon conquering Spain and putin a brother on the Throne in Madrid, The people living in the Viceroyalty or New Spain declared their independence and proclaimed a new nation Mexico (named after the Azrec Empire named Mexica). Before Napoleon conquered Spain the Spanish King tried to appease Napoleon by giving Louisiana back to France so the border between Louisiana was chosen by Napoleon to be along the Sabine and Red Rivers. Napoleon not wanting to see the British capture it sold it to The USA in 1803. Mexico was recognized as a independence nation and its northern border set by the Congress of Vienna in 1815 that sorted out Europe after the surrender of Napoleon at Waterloo.
The Mexicans made Tejas one their northern provinces along with Nuevo Mexico and Alto (Upper) California. Mexico's hold on these places was weak for they were far from the District Federal (Mexico City). The Mexican government provided little anything in the way of value or military support but insisted the taxes get paid. Americans from the mid South and South began to go into Texas after those parts of the USA became settled enough to be full states or the 1820s. Mexico was taken over by a military strongman (Caudillo) named Lopez de Santa Ana.
Now we are at the point Texas school text books say Texas history began . I agree recent Johnny come lately Americans and original Tejanos rebelled against Mexico and Lopez de Santa Ana. He chose to use military force to sequre his countries sovereign territory. An act that is fully understandable and would be our nations reaction if recent Mexican settlers or immigrants legal or otherwise decided to rebel and return the US SW California or Texas t The United Sates of Mexico or to create a new nation called Azatlan for The Aztecs migrated from the North to Mexico in the Middle Ages (13th Century).
The Texans won and The New republic and Mexico drew a new Western and southern border for Texas in 1836 and after a short period of liberty became a US state in 1845. The Mexicans didn't recognize this annexation and had other problems with Americans going to California and thinking that this lands was also theirs for the taking. So war broke out again didn't it.
Whether the annexation of the American SW, Texas and California is grand theft of half a million square miles and the resources on it from Mexico by American interlopers or the much nicer myth we like to teach in American schools is a mater of opinion.
I like to think is goes like this you have a nice car or truck in your drive way which I want real bad. I come over one day get in the vehicle and drive it away as if its now mine. You get really POed and come with a gun to get it back if need be by using deadly force. Now I have a very good gun too and thanks to our nice stand your ground law I'll shoot you between the eyes and claim I feared for my life and shot you in self defense. Now when the cops show up to sort this all out I'll convince because I'm a nice white guy them the gun play was in self defense and won't tell them I stole your vehicle which is still parked in my driveway!
Long story short: Texas become a Republic, and then chose to join the U.S.
The U.S. did not "steal" Texas.
Mexico sold California, etc., to the U.S.
The U.S. did not "steal" the Southwest.
The French owned a lot of land in the West, not just the Spanish.
The French had Canada and, during the French and Indian Wars, the English fought the French long before Napoleon and long before the U.S. existed.
In the meantime, it seems that Russia owned Alaska. We bought it from them, and it eventually became a state.
It seems to me that Mexicans' real beef is with the Spanish, not the Anglos.
It would be interesting to see them try to illegally immigrate to Spain...
On the other hand, the Mexicans have a decent amount of land for themselves, rich with resources, but with a corrupt government that needs to be reformed or overthrown.
The anchor baby should be deported with its parents until they reach the age of 18, at which time they should be welcomed back into the country as a citizen. Unless the family decides to leave them here under state custody as the OP posted.
Just my two cents.
The anchor baby should be deported with its parents until they reach the age of 18, at which time they should be welcomed back into the country as a citizen.
Anchor babies are neither Constitutionally nor legally U.S. citizens. That's just been fairly recent politically expedient "policy."
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Time again to post the long legal history on this and/or refresh everyone's memory...
The children of illegal aliens born in the U.S. were never intended to have birthright citizenship. This is how we know...
1) The 14th Amendment and it's original intent:
Senator Trumbull: "The provision is, that ‘all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.’ That means ‘subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.’ What do we mean by ‘complete jurisdiction thereof? Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means."
Children born in the U.S. to a foreign citizen parent whose country has jus sanguinis (right of blood) citizenship law were never supposed to be born U.S. citizens. They may choose to naturalize as a U.S. citizen at some point, but they were never intended to be U.S. citizens at birth. Only those ignorant of historical fact and the Congressional Record misinterpret the 14th Amendment to mean anything else.
2) Article XXV Section 1992 of the 1877 Revised Statutes, enacted after the 14th Amendment, which clarified exactly who are U.S. citizens at birth per the Constitution:
"All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States".
3) U.S. Secretaries of State determinations as to exactly who has birthright citizenship:
Secretary of State Frederick Frelinghuysen determined Ludwig Hausding, though born in the U.S., was not born a U.S. citizen because he was subject to a foreign power at birth having been born to a Saxon subject alien father.
Similarly, Secretary of State Thomas Bayard determined Richard Greisser, though born in Ohio, was not born a U.S. citizen because Greisser's father, too, was an alien, a German subject at the time of Greisser's birth. Bayard specifically stated that Greisser was at birth 'subject to a foreign power,' therefore not "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.
4) In regards to illegal aliens' anchor babies... Their parents were NOT in the U.S. legally and therefore did NOT have a permanent domicile and residence in the U.S. as did Wong Kim Ark's, a fact on which SCOTUS based their determination that WKA was born a U.S. citizen:
WKA decision:
"The evident intention, and the necessary effect, of the submission of this case to the decision of the courtupon 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."
The parents must have a permanent domicile and residence in the U.S. WKA's parents were living in the U.S. legally. Illegal immigrants don't have a permanent domicile in the U.S. because they are in the country illegally. Furthermore, it is a federal offense to harbor an illegal alien in the U.S., or aid or abet in their harboring in the U.S. Illegal aliens' permanent domicile is in their home country; the country which would issue their passports were they to have one.
For political reasons, the 14th Amendment has been bastardized since then, but such bastardization was never an actual Constitutional Amendment.
5) The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 which had to be enacted because even when Native Americans were born in the U.S., they were not U.S. citizens. Why? Because they were subject to a foreign power (Indian Nations). Note that the 1924 date of this Act is significantly later than both the 14th Amendment and the Wong Kim Ark ruling.
I realize that's a lot of historical information to digest. But sadly, our public education system is such a joke that very few people are aware of the history surrounding the 14th Amendment and how subsequent births to parents of various nationalities were treated in the U.S. up until "policy" (not the Constitution or the law) very recently changed.
There has never been any law passed, similar to the 1924 Indian Citizenship Act, that gives birthright citizenship to anyone born in the U.S. but subject to a foreign power.
Last edited by InformedConsent; 08-24-2015 at 07:57 AM..
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.
