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.
PS Obama did not sign more EOs than previous presidents. Not even close.
Obama did say the constitution was out of date and antiquated
and no Obama did not sign the most EO's in the last 40 years
that tittle goes to Reagan, Clinton, and the one with the most in the least years...Carter
trump 2 years......85 Obama 8 years.....275
wbush 8 years.....290
Clinton 8 years....363
bush sr 4 years.....165
Reagan 8 years... 380
carter 4 years .... 319
carter had more in 4 years than Obama, or wbush had in 8 years
its funny, that when the fascist liberals are talking about singlepayer they say :.."most DEVLOPED countries have some sort of singlepayer"... and say do you want to be like Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, and Panama that don't have it
for birth right. they just say "Dozens of countries have Jus Soil laws"....
meanwhile by their singlepayer STANDARD... only 2... the US and Canada
liberals will spin and lie to get their agenda
Canada has single payer as do the south American countries you mentioned. Did you have a point to make?
PS I do not care what liberals, or anyone else has told you. Take it up with them.
Obama did say the constitution was out of date and antiquated
and no Obama did not sign the most EO's in the last 40 years
that tittle goes to Reagan, Clinton, and the one with the most in the least years...Carter
trump 2 years......85 Obama 8 years.....275
wbush 8 years.....290
Clinton 8 years....363
bush sr 4 years.....165
Reagan 8 years... 380
carter 4 years .... 319
Looks like Trumpy might break a record. Again, which Amendment did Obama void by EO?
Well, why don't you raise a stink about it and claim they violated the Constitution.
Because they didn't. Children born to alien parents owe allegiance to other than the US, and according to the Amendment's proposer, Senator Howard, do not qualify for 14th Amendment citizenship.
Quote:
Maybe someone already did. To the rest of us it makes sense that a port of entry would be an exception since those people were never admitted into the US, but instead turned back.
Illegal aliens were never admitted to the US, either. Their US-born children, too, are aliens, not 14th Amendment US citizens.
Quote:
The 14th amendment says persons born in US are citizens.
Where's the stated exception in the 14th Amendment for those born in ports of entry under US jurisdiction? Those kids, subject to US jurisdiction at the time of birth, were either classified as aliens themselves and/or were deported. There's a plethora of Federal Government archival evidence stating exactly so.
You objected to paying to educate the children of illegal immigrants. I am simply pointing out that your property taxes are going to be the same regardless of whether the child belongs to a family of illegal immigrants v. legal immigrants or even U.S. citizens. When it comes to the amount of property taxes you pay to fund your local school district, it makes no economic difference to you either way.
Regardless, the balance of your point seems odd. I don't think anyone disagrees that open borders are incompatible with our current level social services. That is probably why we don't have open borders - and why no politician of any import has proposed that we do.
I figured that was obvious. Homes are built to fill a demand. If there is no demand for homes, the land goes unbuilt. Who wants to spend a lot of money building something that nobody wants to buy or rent? Any increase in poor people increases demand to build housing for them.
For example, towns in my state are being forced to build low income housing because there is such a demand. Tha means a lot of added kids into the school system at a very discounted rate. Apartment buildings that rent to families with kids do not give nearly the return on the investment as single family homes with only 2 or 3 kids to educate per 1/2 acre.
As to the open borders, it does seem like you guys are for them. Many of you dont seem to want to do anything permanent or substantial to stop illegal immigration, so what am I to think.
Because they didn't. Children born to alien parents owe allegiance to other than the US, and according to the Amendment's proposer, Senator Howard, do not qualify for 14th Amendment citizenship.
Illegal aliens were never admitted to the US, either. Their US-born children, too, are aliens, not 14th Amendment US citizens. Where's the stated exception in the 14th Amendment for those born in ports of entry under US jurisdiction? Those kids, subject to US jurisdiction at the time of birth, were either classified as aliens themselves and/or were deported. There's a plethora of Federal Government archival evidence stating exactly so.
How many times are you going to repeat your post
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside"
Deported. Exactly. The US has the authority to do that because it's under US jurisdiction. Understand?
Babies born on Ellis Island to alien parents, which is/was under US jurisdiction, were NOT granted automatic 14th Amendment US citizenship. And that's a very important piece of evidence.
Evidence? I thought evidence usually came from verifiable sources
In 1892 a baby born to a mother who was deemed unfit for entry into the US was denied citizenship, authorities relied on a Treasury department decision stating that parents on Ellis Island had not "landed" but no record of that rule has been found and it appears to have been recalled by 1906 when all babies born at Ellis Island were granted citizenship.
That was later affirmed by a memo from the state department
"A child born in an immigration detention center physically located in the United States is considered to have been born in the United States and be subject to its jurisdiction. This is so even if the child's parents have not been legally admitted to the United States and, for immigration purposes, may be viewed as not being in the United States". Memorandum of the Office of the Solicitor for the Department of State on Ona Laszas (Feb. 6, 1930)
I figured that was obvious. Homes are built to fill a demand. If there is no demand for homes, the land goes unbuilt. Who wants to spend a lot of money building something that nobody wants to buy or rent? Any increase in poor people increases demand to build housing for them.
For example, towns in my state are being forced to build low income housing because there is such a demand. Tha means a lot of added kids into the school system at a very discounted rate. Apartment buildings that rent to families with kids do not give nearly the return on the investment as single family homes with only 2 or 3 kids to educate per 1/2 acre.
So what you're really saying is you don't like poor people in your school district.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside"
if you are here illegally... you don't LEGALLY reside anywhere in the US
Last edited by workingclasshero; 11-01-2018 at 11:11 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.
