Posted on 08/18/2015 2:43:34 PM PDT by bestintxas
So President Trump somehow gets the congress which is filled with people FR hates to change the law..( these stupid people called Senators like Rubio)
Then we get a court case in the Supreme Court which overturns the law. I guess President Trump then has the backing of FR to do exactly what Obama has done ..assume the power and do what is “the right thing to do” as he so often says
After all Obama has set a wonderful precedence
No, in the 14th amendment it is specifically relating to citizenship based on birth or naturalization.
Read the 14th Section 1.
I don’t know how they have gotten away with allowing the offspring of illegals to be declared citizens this long.
Actually, the Supreme Court has now decreed that what the drafters of the Constitution intended their words to mean is utterly irrelevant.
The Constitution says whatever the Hell 5 out of 9 Supreme Court Justices currently want it to say.
No, it is not. They made this very clear in the precursor to the 14th amendment which was the Civil rights act of 1866.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States; and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same right, in every State and Territory in the United States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none other, any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, to the contrary notwithstanding.
Of course it doesn’t say anything about authorizing anchor babies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Find me some lawyers that agree with you and I will find some that won’t
So this is gonna be nothing but fun
see my #21
Rubio is all dressed up and shouting something, but he’s on the nobody side of the velvet rope. The bouncers ignore him as they clear a path to whisk Trump and his entourage into Club 2016.
They have often been referred to by conservative commenters as "an ongoing constitutional convention."
I find that perspective quite accurate.
Rubio is doing the bidding of his corporatist donor base. They need to keep the magnet working by funneling welfare to illegal immigrant families. Anchor babies are how they get to stay in this country and receive benefits.
Rubio has shot himself in the foot so often it doesn’t even hurt anymore.
Rubio might as well come out and give the standard answer to Trump, “racist.” Maybe Rubio should then burnish his anti-racist credentials at Trump’s expense.
Lawyers which do not agree with me about this are either ignorant or lying. The 14th amendment was intended to grant citizenship to freed slaves, it was not intended to grant citizenship to illegals. It does not do such a thing. Liberal judges do such things, and they need to be dealt with.
How can it? He doesn’t have one left.
It’s completely gone and cauterized over in this instance.
There is nowhere in the wording of the 14th Amendment, any guarantee of citizenship for so-called “anchor babies”, and while it has been the practice to bestow citizenship to children of illegal aliens, this has never been ruled on by the Supreme Court.
But so far, nobody has filed an injunction with any Federal court calling the status of “anchor babies” into question.
But wait until we get the Supreme Court again filled with Constitutional scholars rather than political activists, or those subject to blackmail intimidation.
Bingo !
I'm hoping Trump knocks out all the establishment Rinos and clears a path for Cruz or perhaps Walker. I'd really rather not have a President Trump.
We don't need another egomaniac clown. Obama was enough.
That was a very interesting article. I wondered where the current lunacy came from.
Thank you for the link!
Meanwhile, Scalia, Kennedy, Breyer and Ginsburg will all be in their 80s next year. If Hillary gets to replace any three of them, then an oligarchy of far left wing Supreme Justices will be dictating every aspect of our lives for the next 30 years.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
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.