Trump to enforce 14th Amendment

[Kar98]

I guess we are taking past each other. Maybe I misconstrued your quote of the DoI, or maybe you misunderstood my response. IDK.

Feels like we aren’t really getting the others point though. Damn internet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, possibly. I was trying to make a point where the Founders had this or that in mind, but to what end, I can't remember anymore, LOL. Stupid internet.

 

[Wildcat Diva]

Again. The argument is that “it’s all in the ‘and.’”

I haven’t seen convincing evidence that the “and” part of the amendment is settled, and evidence to support that we have most certainly been “getting this exactly right” over the past few years with granting citizenship to “birth tourists” and the like.

 

[Wildcat Diva]

It addresses the part of suspected divided loyalty of legal immigrants, both LPRs and naturalized citizens, and US born citizens, and whether they are "real" citizens of the US, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof; and if the president can declare people born in the US to un-citizens suspected of all kinds of mischief.

Well I’ll have to give that a closer look then.

 

[Younggun]

Personally, I feel it’s outside of the presidents scope.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[karlac]

This is the kind of information I’m craving. Thank you.

Keep in mind it that while it makes a certain amount of sense/logic, it is only one side of the argument that's been debated for well over a hundred years.

Words are easy, the devil is in the interpretation. lol

 

[karlac]

Personally, I feel it’s outside of the presidents scope.

To some, it depends upon the President ...

 

[Wildcat Diva]

Here is a question.

If just being born on US soil automatically means that they are, by that occurance, subject to the jurisdiction of the US... then what’s with even including that clause?

If the “and” doesn’t somehow mean that both conditions should be fulfilled, then what is it doing in there? I mean, god forbid there should be an “and” gunking up the second amendment... thank god for that.

I mean, if they had replaced “and” with “thus”, you’ve sold me. Until the text is further clarified, I can only read the text following the “and” as a presently vague condition to be defined and fulfilled before granting citizenship.

 

[Kar98]

The "and", as far as I can tell, would exclude people with diplomatic immunity, foreign military and government agents.
Only people who live here and aren't here on behalf of foreign governments.

And now that I think about it, probably Indians, too. Maybe.

 

[karlac]

Here is a question.

If just being born on US soil automatically means that they are, by that occurance, subject to the jurisdiction of the US... then what’s with even including that clause?

If the “and” doesn’t somehow mean that both conditions should be fulfilled, then what is it doing in there? I mean, god forbid there should be an “and” gunking up the second amendment... thank god for that.

I mean, if they had replaced “and” with “thus”, you’ve sold me. Until the text is further clarified, I can only read the text following the “and” as a presently vague condition to be defined and fulfilled before granting citizenship.

You're right, in a previous post, that in legalese "and" by itself sets up more than one condition.
I share your frustration ... but it's a lawyer's delight.

 

[easy rider]

Personally, I feel it’s outside of the presidents scope.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can agree with that, but I don't think it's outside of his scope to have it pushed towards the supreme court.

 

[karlac]

I can agree with that, but I don't think it's outside of his scope to have it pushed towards the supreme court.

That last prolific wielder of EO's would certainly have not hesitated.

 

[AustinN4]

I'm also rakishly handsome and fun at parties!

I would only go so far as to say the kitty in your avatar is rakishly handsome and is probably a lot of fun. You? Who knows?

 

[sharkey]

Have not read all 300+ comments. Levin and Horowitz, constitutional law attorneys much smarter than me, say it can be done by EO. That is good enough for me. The mental misfits at CNN and penny plan Paul Ryan have no idea what they are talking about.
40% of the population hears DT is gonna end it and well now they have something new to rake him over the coals with. Either way, the country is doomed.

Sent from my SM-T380 using Tapatalk

 

[TheMailMan]

The "and", as far as I can tell, would exclude people with diplomatic immunity, foreign military and government agents.
Only people who live here and aren't here on behalf of foreign governments.

And now that I think about it, probably Indians, too. Maybe.

The 14th Amendment did not cover Native Americans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Citizenship_Act

Granting them US Citizenship came later.

Which brings up an interesting point. If it required a separate act to grant Native Americans citizenship since the Tribes are considered separate nations then how is someone here illegally able to have birthright citizenship?

 

[Younggun]

Nothing new, but I enjoy his perspectives.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Kingarthur777]

I want to know more about the jurisdiction part. Pretty sure I couldn’t pursue further charges against the illegal who was drunk and crashed his car into my parked truck. He just got deported back to Mexico and I was out of luck.

I do believe that although there is some due process for them afforded, it IS limited rights based on non-citizen status. It is not equal consideration and not given as far as that is given to a citizen. So we do not have true jurisdiction over them, because we mostly just deport? Does it have to do more with residency status? Someone help me out here with more information to help me refine my understanding.

I’m just thinking out loud trying out thinking processes; please don’t flame me.

No, I am not going to flame you. As I explained earlier DWI stopped being a removable charge, by law/policy. I disagree with it, but I was the one who had to hold the stinky bag on that one. I too was struck by a no insurance, wrong way driving illegal alien in Laredo to the point it busted the axel of my little Nissan Truck when I was driving home from work. I had two other Border Patrol Agents coming behind me, and probably the only White PD in town. So, plenty of witnesses. They, of course, were illegal, and had no insurance, so my insurance went up. It just illustrates the financial devastation illegal aliens inflict on society. Obama loved to tie my hands, and tried to bring in terrorists at every opportunity. This President has gone the opposite direction, which I don't mind. He just says really dumb things like writing an EO to abolish the 14th Amendment. He has no authority to do so.

He doesn't realize it, but his problem isn't with the Constitution (we hope), but with the INA as written by Congress. Had he said, "We need to revise the Immigration and Nationality Act, and I am going to work with Congress to try to get this done," he wouldn't have sounded like a blithering idiot, and would not have further narrowed the gap in the midterm.

 

[Wildcat Diva]

Oh I agree that Trump could speak better. Did he actually say abolish though?

 

[Dad_Roman]

Maybe.....

Thought someone posted his video, like, 300 posts back.

 

[easy rider]

Oh I agree that Trump could speak better. Did he actually say abolish though?

Depends on who you listen to.

 

[Kar98]

Depends on who you listen to.