Posted on 01/26/2018 10:04:43 AM PST by Brian Griffin
The issue is not territorial jurisdiction, it’s political jurisdiction which goes to allegiance.
The woman is a citizen of a foreign nation, i.e., a subject.
Therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the nation that she belongs to.
You are making the same semantic mistake that others do, because the original understanding is not understood now over a century and a half later. Eastman and Meese explain this in their brief in Hamdi.
“He offered them the best deal they were ever going to get and they said no, just as he expected.”
Trump is not a fool - he likes to win, and fixes the chess board so that he does.
“Many legal immigrants are justifiably angry and feeling cheated.”
DACA doesn’t exist in any other country.
Old news kid...
Weve known this for years...
Are you backpedaling your anti-IMMIGRATION post now or is this your tiny way of apologizing to the IMMIGRANTS in these threads ???
No, the fundamental problem is finding people:
1. Are presentable
2. Can pass a drug test
3. Are reliable
4. Don’t have baggage
5. Know opportunity means work
6. Can reason and extend fundamental knowledge to skills
I have no idea of your background but I have seen a string of tradesmen in the last 4 months on a project I have. I would not keep 10% of them.
>
“eVerify (no authority)”
The US government has the necessary and proper authority to protect a state from an invasion of Central American scofflaws.
As we know, millions can get past a border, especially one without a wall.
>
So?? How does that negate having/requiring Constitutional authority to foist upon BIZ that which is the purview of Fedzilla?
Just another foist upon biz that which govt cannot/won’t. It’s not up to biz to ensure the Fed. does its J-O-B.
>
Also, the US has a $20 trillion debt and it can’t pay it without having most working people making wages high enough to be able to pay substantial taxes.
>
Again, so? Actually, Fedzilla has run up $120T+ in unfunded liabilities via the Socialist Ponzi schemes, NONE of which are Constitutional. IMO, the ‘debt’ is null & void.
Per the 13th, we not longer have slaves; even of the economic bent, let alone by the 4th/5th.
SECTION 1. The federal government shall have the power to implement the IMMIGRATION AMNESTY and REFORM ACT of 2018.
SECTION 2. Previous Congressional immigration amnesties are hereby made lawful.
SECTION 3. The first sentence of SECTION 1 of Amendment XIV is hereby repealed.
SECTION 4. Henceforth, every child born in the USA after ratification shall be born with the citizenship of their mother as of 320 days prior to birth. Any Congress may authorize for its term and for seven years thereafter that each child covered by its law is to be treated as if it has the citizenship of its bona fide father, except for voting purposes, provided its father has for at least four years (or until the death of its mother) shared custody, child raising and financial child support responsibilities with its mother or its mother died in the USA before the child was one month old.
SECTION 5. No person may be granted US citizenship unless the person is over age 22 and proves US residence in at least 54 of the prior 60 months and lawful US earnings of at least $4,000 each quarter in at least 17 of the prior 20 quarters.
SECTION 6. No treaty may be entered into that would or could:
a. require US residency, naturalization, citizenship or welfare benefits to be granted
b. restrict or bar deportation or impair US entry security
c. impose any form of international taxation within the United States
d. require any payment from any domestic person or non-federal entity
e. impose any penalty upon any domestic government
f. remain in force in excess of ten years.
SECTION 7. No bill proposing an immigration/naturalization legal change and a federal expediture for any extraneous purpose may become law.
SECTION 8. Any state may require state/federal photo ID tender for state-related voting purposes, subject to appropriate federal statutory law.
SECTION 9. Each state shall require proof of US citizenship & state/federal photo ID tender for state-related voting purposes after 2023, subject to appropriate federal statutory law.
SECTION 10. Federal employer/income taxation may be levied at no more than 120% of existing rates.
Federal employer/income taxation limits/rates/rate thresholds may be changed by no more than 1/20th in any year.
SECTION 11. A federal statutory financial imposition may only be levied/increased/decreased/terminated/rebated/annulled (under then existing law or) with the same day approval of at least two-thirds of the members of both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
SECTION 12. All amounts collected from Federal estate taxation shall be used to pay down the existing national debt and that distinctly refinanced, or refunded.
SECTION 13. There shall be no multi-state/federal wealth or property taxation except that estate taxation and real property taxation in what is now the District of Columbia.
SECTION 14. Effective with the elections of November 2022, the House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every fourth year by qualified voters of the several states.
SECTION 15. No person (or their spouse or child) may be elected or otherwise placed into a Constitutional office for a subsequent term while the national debt of the United States exceeds $25 trillion.
SECTION 16. No sibling, child, grandchild or spouse of a President may hold the office of President or Vice President.
SECTION 17. The President shall have line item veto power.
“permanent resident status on a conditional basis”
My apologies for letting that one slip by.
Perhaps:
Six-Month Temporary Resident Status on conditional renewal basis
“eVerify (no authority)”
Weak authority, yes
I’ll change it to eliminate tax deductibility of unverified labor.
If the Mexican mom in a Laredo hospital beat her newborn to death, could she be tried for murder in a US court?
Yes!
Therefore she is in US jurisdiction.
If the Mexican mom in a Laredo hospital just slugged her newborn, could the newborn be taken away from her under US law?
Yes!
Therefore the baby is in US jurisdiction.
If the Mexican mom in a Laredo hospital was high on cocaine while delivering, could her ‘coke baby’ be taken away from her under US law?
Yes!
Therefore the baby is in US jurisdiction.
If newborn was the male heir to a $10 billion Mexican fortune, could he be taxed under US law?
Yes!
Therefore the baby is in US jurisdiction.
You continue to make the same superficial mistake.
As far as being taxed, that's not at all clear. Good luck trying to make that case.
As John Eastman explained to the Congress about the case of Hamdi:
and the Court has never actually held that anyone who happens to make it to U.S. soil can unilaterally bestow U.S. citizenship on their children merely by giving birth here.
Although such an understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment has become widespread in recent years, it is not the understanding of those who drafted the Fourteenth Amendment, or of those who ratified it, or of the leading constitutional commentators of the time.
Neither was it the understanding of the Supreme Court when the Court first considered the matter in 1872, or when it considered the matter a second time a decade later in 1884, or even when it considered the matter a third time fifteen years after that in the decision many erroneously view as interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment to mandate automatic citizenship for anyone and everyone born on U.S. soil, whether their parents were here permanently or only temporarily, legally or illegally, or might even be here as enemy combatants seeking to commit acts of terrorism against the United States and its citizens.
The True Meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause
Read and educate yourself.
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.