Click the Pic
Support Free Republic
Make it a monthly if you can
Posted on 07/06/2014 6:08:49 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Tens of thousands of Central American children, some accompanied by adults but most traveling alone, have surged across the U.S.-Mexican border in recent months. The flood has swamped the border security infrastructure as well as the youth housing facilities maintained by the Department of Health and Human Services.
Washington can, and should, try to stop illegal immigration at the border, but it would be wiser, and more humane, to find ways to stabilize the communities from which immigrants are running. Any solutions must come with the full involvement and engagement of the governments of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras and Mexico, a challenge given the endemic corruption in those governments. But the U.S. is in the best position to bring the players together and forge the strategic, regional approach to ending this humanitarian crisis.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
I find this fascinating in a horrible sort of way. Because we already know that both wings of the uniparty favor essentially unfettered immigration. Few of these people are going to get kicked out of the country. The political class will posture and pontificate and do nothing. And we will in effect be overrun by the populations of these countries. All to the joy of the uniparty and it’s cronies.
Yeah, but wouldn't that be "imperialistic" and "imposing our values"?
It most certainly is an 'interpretation since the present understanding is contrary to that of the authors of 14A. From FederalistBlog: What ‘Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof’ Really Means
In Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment (1998) the court said “jurisdiction is a word of many, too many, meanings.” Therefore, it is important to discover the operational meaning behind “subject to the jurisdiction” as employed under the Fourteenth Amendment rather then assuming its meaning from other usages of the word jurisdiction alone. Both Sen. Trumbull and Sen. Howard provides the answer, with Trumbull declaring:
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.
Anyone who can be detained by agents of the United States, brought before a magistrate, suffer penalties prescribed by law including confinement and forfeiture is, beyond a doubt, “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States.
It won’t happen in those countries until they evolve beyond the “Old Europe Disease” left behind by the Spanish.
OED is a social structure based on their being only two social classes, the nobility and the peasantry, that such classes are hereditary, and that they are sustained through the Civil Law legal system, formerly the Code Napoleon, which itself was derived from Roman Law.
It amounts to “the law of the nobility”, and has several ideas repugnant to those who live in nations based in Common Law. For example, the assumption of guilt, not innocence; and that activities not mentioned in the law are criminal by default, not the other way around, so that the people must have government permission to invent or innovate. “Equality” just means that the nobles are equal to other nobles, and peasants are equal to other peasants.
Some of this was mitigated in 20th Century Europe, but the underlying concepts remain.
Mexico South, through central America and South America is almost all Civil Law, excepting Belize and Guyana.
In human terms, compare two multi-billionaires, Bill Gates and Carlos Slim of Mexico. Gates has indirectly created a dozen or more billionaires, thousands or even tens of thousands of multimillionaires, and enriched millions, and it has not troubled him one bit.
Slim, on the other hand, is of the dozen or so wealthy families of Mexico that control the vast majority of the wealth. He would never dream of significantly enriching anyone not a member of one of these families. And the vast majority of his employees are minimum wage workers.
Had he not intended to do so, he would have indirectly created many rich people, but he has gone out of his way to insure that this did not happen. Because while they do not call themselves “nobles” and everyone else “peasants”, that is how they behave.
Needless to say, the peasants are not thrilled at all with the idea of being kept down, which tends to radicalize them as socialists. They want to tear down the rich, but at the same time they also suffer from OED, so they want to *take the place* of the rich, *over* the other peasants.
The most recent example of this was the revolution in Venezuela, where Chavez rode to power on a wave of peasant populism, promising wealth for all. But as soon as he was in power, while indeed harming the rich and the middle classes, he did nothing for the poor with any lasting value. And yet, he lived in the palaces of the wealthy he had driven out, and otherwise embraced the trappings of the rich, if just a little less publicly.
OED even afflicts many American Democrats (and some Republican RINOs). They cannot escape the idea that they are special, that they are part of the elite class that is destined to rule. You saw it in the Kennedys, and you see it in the Bush family. So while they do not agree politically, they have much agreement socially.
In the final analysis, what we are seeing now in this rush of illegal aliens, are ambitious peasants voting with their feet. They see no hope of their own nations even advancing beyond two-class states, and are sick to death of being kept down as peasants. They want to escape to a place where they at least have a chance to better their own lives.
That when they arrive here they embrace the Democrat party is no surprise, for among other diseases, they still have OED, and it takes generations for immigrants to finally shed that sickness of the soul.
Your reading is false.
“Subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is an a priori state.
A citizen who breaks no law is still by virtue of citizenship “subject to the jurisdiction”.
The illegal who breaks another law and comes into contact with potential enforcers retains the a priori state of a foreign national. They are only “subject to the jurisdiction” insofar as their subsequent violation must be adjudicated.
A rational president would pardon all illegal alien murderers held in our prisons and dump them in Mexico City’s airport.
If those numbers were to get out, there would be an open revolt, but the ministry of propaganda will die on their swords to protect their "One."
Mark
Sane people would call this a Pandemic. Obama is purposefully releasing these diseased rats into our unsuspecting population.
Thanks for the reference.
I tend to be an extreme literalist in terms of Constitutional language, because any other position makes the document almost meaningless. XIV and XXII are the two worst-drafted amendments, nevertheless, they say what they say.
For example, I believe that Bill Clinton can run for Vice President and can succeed to the office of President by any means other than election. Certainly contrary to intent, but allowed by plain English reading of the text.
“In other words, only children born to American citizens can be considered citizens of the United States since only a American citizen could enjoy the “extent and quality” of jurisdiction of an American citizen now” (Quote from your link).
Hinrich Butt, subject of the Emperor of Germany, arrived at New York in 1879. He married another subject of said Emperor in 1887, without naturalizing, and she bore him five children in Brooklyn, NY between 1888 and 1895. One of them died in childhood, four survived and either applied for US passports, registered for the 1917 draft, or both.
All four children who survived to adulthood listed their US citizenship as “natural born” or “native born” (depending on the form language), and, as far as I know, this was never questioned.
Do you contend that my grandfather and his siblings were NOT US citizens by virtue of birth in the State of New York and the XIV Amendment alone?
It always comes back to the pot smokers! God made grapes and Satan made buds.
“We are the world!
We are the children!
We are the ones who take your money to use it for our purposes!”
The LA Times can take every cent they get from advertising and subscriptions and send it to Central America instead of paying their employees. Until they do that, they’re just a bunch of children wishing on stars.
More lies. There is nothing going on in central America that constitutes a crises. These kids parents are risking their childrens’ lives in the hope that they will get amnesty and the parents can follow. I’d ask why they are not immediately returned to their countries of origin, but I know the answer.
We might want to ponder if we can’t stop an invasion of children, how would we handle one comprised of armed men?
This is an ORGANIZED INVASION from good ‘ol Mehhiccco.
They are the enemy.
Treat them as such.
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.