Posted on 08/16/2015 9:24:22 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
Edited on 08/16/2015 3:07:18 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Donald Trump has made headline after headline with his remarks on immigrants and immigration, but now his presidential campaign has put together its
(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...
IIRC he’s said that ALL illegals have to go.
Thanks. I sit better informed now.
I'd say it's included in #2. No need to make deportation stand out from all the others. Just enforce the law. Deportation is the law. I'm sure he'll be asked about again, so he can clarify. But it doesn't have to be a separate item in his written policy.
2. A nation without laws is not a nation. Laws passed in accordance with our Constitutional system of government must be enforced.
Build the wall to help control terrorists, drug dealers, other nefarious people.
Cut off the freebies and jobs to control illegal invaders wanting to relocate to the USA.
No more anchor babies. There are mixed views on whether it would really require a constitutional amendment. Test the waters.
good post kabar!!!!
The Constitution is clear in it’s language.
The 14th amendment starts with this sentence.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”
Now, the problem is that it does not matter to this language if a person is legally or illegally in the country.
It. Does. Not. Matter.
The language gives no other instruction. If an ‘anchor baby’ is
1) born... in the United States
and
2) subject to the jurisdiction thereof
they are, by virtue of the Constitution, a citizen at birth of the United States.
The second point confuses people. They think that if someone is here illegally, they aren’t subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, but that isn’t true. Illegal aliens are under the jurisdiction of the United States. They can be arrested and charged with crimes by courts appointed by the United States.
So what does the second point refer to? People who have diplomatic immunity are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, i.e. they cannot be charged with a crime nor stand trial under a court appointed by the United States. Because they are not under the jurisdiction of the United States, any child born to them is NOT a citizen of the United States, even when born here.
Now, I would 100% support an amendment to the Constitution that declared that anybody born to a mother who did not have legal right of permanent residency must be naturalized to become a citizen of the United States, but the way the Constitution reads now, an illegal alien who gives birth in the United States, gives birth to a United States citizen.
How so? Birthright citizenship was conjured up by SCOTUS in 1982. I wasn't aware that SCOTUS was given the power to Naturalize citizens...../s
I hope it becomes a reality.
That doesn’t say much.
Yes, it is a very good idea.
Yep, taking the incentive away from CoC and IT businesses.
You cannot just wave your hand and dismiss that fact. We’ve been fooled before.
Here’s the link specifying Trump met with Sessions to help develop his plan.
Not bad, but I don’t see anything about liquidation camps.
Thx for that link.
Trump would end “birthright citizenship.”
There are Mexicans giving birth as the enter. This happens on the freeways, and right at the border as they enter. This has been going on for decades while people like Bush and Obama winked and nodded.
Millions do this to get a foot in the freebie door.
The world is laughing at us.
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.