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.
That's up to the court to decide, just like they decided it (incorrectly) in the first place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedZin
Not that Trump gives a damn about the constitution, mind you.
Funny coming from an Obama supporter. 55% of Obamas executive orders were overturned as unconstitutional, far more than any other president in the last 50 years. Not to good for a so called "constitutional scholar".
Just because the left howls and wails doesn't make it unconstitutional, odds are it means exactly the opposite.
You'd think liberals would love this change, or would if Obama had made it. It gets the US in line with all those European countries the left fawns over so much. The US and Canada are the only developed nations that have birthright citizenship.
Because a "subject" or being so comes from the common law and means rights and responsibilities and not just being subject to prosecution or law enforcement . And illegal aliens are essentially classified as intruders or invaders of the US jurisdiction. Intruder's or invader's children were not given natural born citizenship even under the common law. And it has not really been adjudicated yet by the Court that the children of any other non-citizens but LPRs are citizens. Lastly conceivably the Court could rule that congress can define the citizenship clause or much much less likely the Executive.
I think the decision could go 5-4 against the children of illegal aliens are born US citizens. But if Trump issues the EO and loses, what was really lost over doing nothing?
Yeah the crybaby will make the other a million other babies cry by his vote
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Barbados, Belize, Brazil, Canada, Chad, Chile, Cuba, Dominica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fiji, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Lesotho, Mexico, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Uruguay and Venezuela.
_______
Nope, the u.s is the only country causing trouble.
Mexico and Canada do NOT offer unconditional birthright citizenship.
The rest I don't know, because who wants to live in any of them?
You might check the difference between nationality and citizenship.
Then why are they? Are you saying SCOTUS ruled incorrectly and the laws as they stand are being done wrong? It is the job of the congress and SCOTUS to determine these types of things, and a bunch of people on the internet saying it's wrong doesn't change anything. And the thread is about the President thinking, and convincing a subset of the population, that he can write an EO and change this. He can't, and I think that is pretty much proven.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikala43
Um, the constitution says born here. You may want to ignore it, and that's fine, but that is what we do, and that is not going to change without a constitutional amendment.
US v. Wong Kim Ark doesn't confirm birthright citizenship for illegal aliens, since that was not what the case was about. Do read the decision. It is crystal clear why the court ruled the way they did. I don't think anyone has disputed the ruling. It just doesn't apply.
And no, it doesn't say "born here". It says born to and subject to the jurisdiction of. You may think words don't have meaning, but they do. So does legislative history.
Um, the constitution says born here. You may want to ignore it, and that's fine, but that is what we do, and that is not going to change without a constitutional amendment.
It also says "and" subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It's a qualifier. The Supreme Court never ruled on what that meant according to the arguments and discussions back then. In fact there have been numerous posts in here that have elaborated on it with good examples of why kids born from illegal aliens were to be excluded. This qualifier would have been redundant and unnecessary if it meant literally everyone born here is an automatic citizen. This has been explained in here over and over yet you and others keep posing the same questions and arguments over and over. Don't you get tired of it?
Mexico and Canada do NOT offer unconditional birthright citizenship.
The rest I don't know, because who wants to live in any of them?
You might check the difference between nationality and citizenship.
Basically playing semantic games. Mexico draws a distinction between national and citizen that we do not. For practical purposes national is sufficient. Mexico also draws significant differences between a born national and a naturalized one. But none of that really reads on this discussion.
It also says "and" subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It's a qualifier. The Supreme Court never ruled on what that meant according to the arguments and discussions back then. In fact there have been numerous posts in here that have elaborated on it with good examples of why kids born from illegal aliens were to be excluded. This qualifier would have been redundant and unnecessary if it meant literally everyone born here is an automatic citizen. This has been explained in here over and over yet you and others keep posing the same questions and arguments over and over. Don't you get tired of it?
Dude, we are doing it, that's how we are upholding the law. All your talk doesn't change how the we view births on American soil. Do you know how funny it is for people on the internet to decide the laws we have and how we enforce them are not really how the laws were intended? You can bash your head against the wall from now until the cows come home.... and still, someone born here is considered a citizen.
If you want it changed, or redefined, there is a process for that, and it sure ain't posting on the internet.
Oh yeah.... and it's NOT an EO.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Barbados, Belize, Brazil, Canada, Chad, Chile, Cuba, Dominica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fiji, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Lesotho, Mexico, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Uruguay and Venezuela.
_______
Nope, the u.s is the only country causing trouble.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTheEnchanter
Mexico and Canada do NOT offer unconditional birthright citizenship.
The rest I don't know, because who wants to live in any of them?
You might check the difference between nationality and citizenship.
I went to three other sources, they all list Canada and Mexico as to have birthright citizenship.
Also out of curiosity I looked at Australia, because the Brits went there too back in the day ...
"British subjects in Australia who were not Australian citizens became permanent residents. ... 1986: The Australian Citizenship (Amendment) Act 1986 provided that children born in Australia on or after 20 August 1986 would only be Australian citizens if at least one parent is an Australian citizen or permanent resident.
<snip>
When Australia created Australian citizenship on 26 January 1949, not all British subjects connected with Australia became Australian citizens on that date."
_________
imo ... u.s. should have modeled it.
btw: You all do know Obama tried to do this too and it didn't work. It won't work for obvious reasons, however, one day some one is going to push the envelope and I do wonder, just what will that look like.
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.
