Posted on 10/30/2018 2:48:25 AM PDT by be-baw
That’s what I’ve been saying it’s due to that fat bass turd Kennedy, the whale of the Senate.
I don't think we're quite there yet. With Kennedy gone, there's every chance that Roberts will become the court's new swing vote.
Don't forget that he stabbed us through the heart with Obamacare.
Yeah, that worries me. I’m hoping Ruth Buzzy doesn’t last too long hope Trump gets to replace her
There is no law which compels the United States to grant birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens, who are born on our soil.
What you're referring to, is the ongoing misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment.
The late, great Lawrence Auster had a fabulous write up on the subject of Birthright Citizenship not long before he died.
It is preserved here:The Truth About Birthright Citizenship
The summary page of all the discussions is here:The Birthright Citizenship Discussion at VFR
Everything here has been discussed before, and it's surprising that it's even controversial what Trump is doing, at least on the American Right.
It's not.
The most important reference in the article is the brief by Meese and Eastman:Brief of Amicus Curiae The Claremont Institute Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence In Support of Respondents
Larry also wrote The Path to National Suicide which explains how we got here, and he wrote it back when people didn't understand what was happening to us as a result of the Left's shenanigans.
The EO is probably a directive to the Federal Government to stop recognizing the children of illegal aliens as citizens for the purpose of issuing passports. There has been a long standing directive from the State Department to do so, absent any legal directive from the courts or the Congress - they just went ahead and did it. They may have some thin backing from Wong Kim Ark or even Plyler v. Doe, but not much. In any event, for the State Department, Trump definitely can change that, and in the long term, the Congress has authority to clarify the Fourteenth, they just haven't. There have been many bills to do so, all failing. But if we hold the Congress, I think that would not be the case.
And that is why we MUST hold the Congress in a week.
Good stuff.
See Post 325.
Distribute widely.
He simply states that he was born in Germany while his father was stationed there, anyone in the need to know, knows what that means-that he is a US citizen.
His BC states he is a US citizen born abroad. Physically he was born on Leighton Barracks, a (former) US installation in West Germany. His BC is recorded at the US Embassy, Frankfort; and Washington DC, but he was born within the FRG state of Bavaria.
As a child of an overseas serving military member, he is a native and natural born US citizen, just like CPT John McCain et al.
While many argue Blackstone and the French guy, citizenship follows blood line before it follows soil.
That is why the 14th is misinterpreted to include illegals dropping babies with illicit purposes on US soil. They are not under the “jurisdiction” of the US regarding loyalties, they are criminals stealing identity and the left/right statists smile, nod and look for a vote...
If a person can be drafted in the military, or vote, then they are under the “jurisdiction thereof”, not simply by required to follow civil law.
Remember, the 14th was drafted and passed post CW explicitly to encompass slaves and children of slaves as citizens. Reading more into it is illogical, but then we are dealing with illogical and bent folks.
“This will not include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.”
The understanding of Sen. Howard is not determinative of the meaning of the Citizenship Clause, but lets assume it is. When I read this, it seems to me Howard is saying that only foreigners who belong to the families of ambassadors are excluded, not foreigners in general.
I think you are reading in an “and” that isn’t there. I would also urge you to read the entire debate in which that quote appears, and remember that Howard did not write those words—they are transcribed from a floor debate.
There might be a good originalist argument for your interpretation of the 14th Amendment, but I don’t think it comes from that quote.
The application of 8 U.S. Code § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth has resulted in millions of the children of illegal aliens born on our soil to become US citizens entitled to all the benefits that obtains including voting. That citizenship will not be withdrawn from those already having it.
What you're referring to, is the ongoing misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment.
You can characterize it anyway you want, but the present practice and precedent continues to confer citizenship on these people every day. Only the courts can correct this "misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment." Trump has started the conversation and I applaud him for it.
I have been working for years to get this into the public forum. Despite many bills introduced by people like Steve King to eliminate birthright citizenship, very few in Congress and the Executive Branch have taken the issue seriously. It is costing us billions of dollars annually in medicaid, educational, and welfare costs. It also provides an incentive for people to come here to have their children, i.e., birth tourism, which is a huge business. It cheapens the meaning of citizenship and it transform the country demographically. When you bring in 1.1 million legal permanent immigrants a year and add 300,000 anchor babies annually, it doesn't take long to colonize this country.
Larry Auster, a great, great man.
Great links. Here is another:
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/hans-von-spakovsky/birthright-citizenship-stems-fundamental-misunderstanding-14th
“Larry Auster, a great, great man”
Yes. He was. It was very hard for me to see him go. An intellect like that comes along so infrequently.
But he lives on in our wonderful cyberspace, a free creation of our collective intellect.
Today is a monumental day. Larry helped bring it about.
Interesting. Thanks for the note.
That's really the bottom line. I hope to see the President throw gasoline on this fire until it consumes the courts, the media, the social networks, and Congress.
Settling this question is long overdue.
You want to stand on plain language? What about the plain right to keep and bear arms. What about the “Constitutional right” to an abortion. Where’s the plain language for that? The Constitution is now a dead white European document, or a living document, depending on how your coin lands. It needs to have the plain language renewed in no uncertain terms, to save it from judicial misinterpretation.
Thanks. I see that now. We’ll see if it gets a reaction.
Larry was so far ahead of the curve on the immigration issue. He inspired many people like me to get engaged.
You should read this from a co-author of the 14th Amendment:
“Who are natural-born citizens but those born within the Republic? Those born within the Republic, whether black and white, are citizens by birth–natural-born citizens. There is no such word as white in your Constitution. Citizenship, therefore, does not depend upon complexion any more than it depends upon the rights of election or of office. All from other lands, who by the terms of your laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural-born citizens. Gentlemen can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution in relation to Indians.”
Cong. Globe, 37th Cong., 2d Sess. 1639 (1862) (statement of Rep. Bingham)
Seems to me he is imply lawful entry and naturalization are prerequisites.
I’m now hearing that the president is CLARIFYING and not ending. He is clarifying that it doesn’t apply to anyone illegally in the US. Scotus will agree with that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.