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.
You haven’t “studied” squat. I’m still waiting for you to explain how undocumented immigrants are less under US jurisdiction than green card holders or citizens.
The Fed Gov is prohibited from issuing them a green card or a passport. They are indeed less under the jurisdiction of the US than citizens and green card holders. They also, by law, are ineligible for federal public assistance programs.
If illegal aliens were under US jurisdiction the same as citizens, the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause would not allow the above examples to happen as it would be... unconstitutional
Deported to where? Many of them only speak English.
Most of them speak the language of their parents, which in the majority of cases is Spanish. It's a very rare one that only knows English.
Deported to where? What are you talking about? If the parents get deported and have American citizen kids who are minors, then they should do what any decent parent would do and that is take their kids with them. It's irrelevant as to what language the kids speak.
I think I know how it will go... And I think the Democrats blew it... The border wall is being built so they can't use it as leverage anymore.... If I was Trump, I would demand end of birthright citizenship amendment similar to the Equal Right amendment with no deadline for states to ratify... Or mandatory E-verify and enforcement....
Hopefully, this nonsense will finally end. Hopefully, the SCOTUS will deem Obama did not have the authority to keep these illegal DACA here legally through his EO. Then we can start deporting these Illegals and send Obama to prison for treason since he is no longer in office.
You dont seem to understand how it works. “Getting people documented and paying taxes.” Only makes the situation better if they are the types of people who contribute more than they receive. If they receive more than they contribute in taxes, that makes the system worse, not better. Most of the people we are talking about are in the latter category. You make them documented, and then they are eligible for all those social services I mentioned in my previous post, and that is an unsustainable model.
Actually 91% of them work, pay taxes and are productive. Compare that to the US LFPR rate od 63%. They are contributors, not takers, which is why it doesn't make sense to make them the priority, but I guess it comes back to the "undoing Obama" childishness.
Current US Nationality Law still in effect to this day disproves that.
Read it, specifically subsections (a) and (b). If everyone born in the US were actually automatically US citizens, subsection (b) would be redundant and would be neither included nor necessary:
The following shall be*nationals*and citizens of the*United States*at birth:
(a) a*person*born in the*United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a*person*born in the*United States*to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe
No, it is not redundant since some people were specifically excluded in the past.
You are welcome to your views, but currently the SCOTUS and pretty much everyone else dismisses as ignorant.
The Fed Gov is prohibited from issuing them a green card or a passport. They are indeed less under the jurisdiction of the US than citizens and green card holders. They also, by law, are ineligible for federal public assistance programs.
You dont seem to have the faintest idea what "subject to jurisdiction" means. If they were not subject to US jurisdiction, they would be immune from our laws, like diplomats, and all your arguments about their alleged crimes would be 100% moot.
Are all US citizens eligible to all federal assistance programs? Obviously not. I am not eligible to a single one, and it has nothing to do with me being subject to US jurisdiction / laws.
No, it is not redundant since some people were specifically excluded in the past.
They're not excluded now. The Nationality Law NOW in effect, and in fact, was last changed in 1994, 70 years after the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, and STILL states:
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe
If everyone born in the US were actually "automatically" US citizens, subsection (b) would be redundant and would be neither included nor necessary.
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.
