cinepro wrote:Trump aside, at the very least I think we should at least admit that the "Birthright Citizenship" clause has developed an unforeseen consequence in the "Birth Tourism" industry.
Fair enough. But if we don't like the Constitution, there is a process to change it.
This isn't a question of needing a Constitutional Amendment/Change....its a question of interpretation as was experienced with Snyder Act and Supreme Court ruling on Wong.
Analytics wrote:Presidents who swear an oath to uphold the Constitution but then sign "executive orders" to invalidate the parts they don't like should be immediately impeached. Isn't that basic civics?
Executive orders are Constitutional, so there is that bit of basic civics....but EOs don't/can't invalidate the Constitution, they interpret them from the Executive Branch much like Laws are an interpretation by the Legislative Branch......it is one of the burdens/responsibilities of the Supreme Court (by design) to officiate how the other 2 branches interpret the Constitution, and the Supreme Court interpretation is called a "Ruling".... its those checks and balances yo.
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Lol... Trump better hope the GOP holds enough seats to prevent an impeachment from happening. This whole affair is nuts. It's like the guy is just throwing anything at the wall hoping something sticks. Man, I can't wait for November 6th, just to see how things pan out.
Impeachment will help Trump, in my opinion. People need to temper their expectations. The post Nov analysis will be interesting. Democrats taking over the house isn't a blue wave. Based on normal historical precedence, it's precisely what should happen. If they fail to take over the house, wow, Democrats are ____. That shows they don't have enough momentum to even realize their historical advantage. If Republicans not only keep the senate but pickup seats, also a bad sign for Democrats. Because that's where the judicial appointments happen. If Democrats take the house, by even a single seat, stock market will dip and then Trump gets to blame democrats for whatever bad economic news there is. He'll bait and troll them into impeaching him, which they'll do. They'll appoint some ultra leftist wacko as the nominee to challenge him. Which also has to be a woman of course. It will be #metoo all the way. And then 2020 will be a massive red wave. And then Ruth Bader Ginsburg will die. At which point libs start jumping off bridges.
None of this takes into account the voter suppression and gerrymandering that has run amuck over the past 20 years.
EAllusion wrote:That's not what the Synder act was doing at all. The Synder Act was clarifying the status of Native Americans within quasi-sovereign territories within the US that have a real argument to being independent nations. Sorting out the status of tribal nations with respect to federal and state law is not a demonstration of the uncertain citizenship status of people born in the United States.
"While the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution defines as citizens any person born in the U.S.A. and subject to its jurisdiction, the amendment has been interpreted that the Tribes are separate Nations to which an Indian owes allegiance and therefore are not under the jurisdiction of the United States. The act was signed into law by President Calvin Coolidge on June 2, 1924. It was enacted partially in recognition of the thousands of Indians who served in the armed forces during World War I."
I linked a ruling specifically on illegal immigrants that was a 9-0 holding. So, objectively, that part of your argument is wrong. And I wouldn't need that ruling to know what is the correct view even if this wasn't the case.
Yeah, why anyone would think this is a case of "interpretation" escapes you....
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
EAllusion wrote:That's not what the Synder act was doing at all. The Synder Act was clarifying the status of Native Americans within quasi-sovereign territories within the US that have a real argument to being independent nations. Sorting out the status of tribal nations with respect to federal and state law is not a demonstration of the uncertain citizenship status of people born in the United States.
"While the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution defines as citizens any person born in the U.S.A. and subject to its jurisdiction, the amendment has been interpreted that the Tribes are separate Nations to which an Indian owes allegiance and therefore are not under the jurisdiction of the United States. The act was signed into law by President Calvin Coolidge on June 2, 1924. It was enacted partially in recognition of the thousands of Indians who served in the armed forces during World War I."
I linked a ruling specifically on illegal immigrants that was a 9-0 holding. So, objectively, that part of your argument is wrong. And I wouldn't need that ruling to know what is the correct view even if this wasn't the case.
Yeah, why anyone would think this is a case of "interpretation" escapes you....
Let me rephrase if you didn’t understand that. What was being interpreted was the status of tribal nations, not the status of people born in the US. The issue at hand was whether tribal nations count as being part of the US for purposes of citizenship status. The 14th amendment’s citizenship clause doesn’t cover people born in other countries.
Water Dog wrote: If Democrats take the house, by even a single seat, stock market will dip and then Trump gets to blame democrats for whatever bad economic news there is. He'll bait and troll them into impeaching him ...
God Almighty. We are now in a situation where a Trump supporter can predict without a blush that the President will do his best to provoke his own impeachment, purely as a political tactic.
This is normal politics, 2018 style.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
If Republicans not only keep the senate but pickup seats, also a bad sign for Democrats. Because that's where the judicial appointments happen. If Democrats take the house, by even a single seat, stock market will dip and then Trump gets to blame democrats for whatever bad economic news there is. He'll bait and troll them into impeaching him, which they'll do. They'll appoint some ultra leftist wacko as the nominee to challenge him. Which also has to be a woman of course. It will be #metoo all the way. And then 2020 will be a massive red wave. And then Ruth Bader Ginsburg will die. At which point libs start jumping off bridges.
I believe that the Democrats are going to take back the House while the Republicans will retain the Senate. The Republicans will pick up a Senate seat from North Dakota since North Dakota is a much redder state than it was six years ago. But I believe that the Democrats will hold on unto the Senate seats from Florida, Indiana, West Virginia and Montana. The Democrats still might be able to pick up one Senate seat from either Arizona or Nevada. As for 2020, I don't believe that there will be a "massive" red wave, but I believe that Trump will likely be re-elected.
"And I've said it before, you want to know what Joseph Smith looked like in Nauvoo, just look at Trump." - Fence Sitter
Really, I don't get why these idiots feel it is to their advantage to delude their flock into thinking their chances are much better than they are.
According to RCP there are 30 Democrat seats likely to flip with another 36 in "toss up" status.
According to 538 there should be about 38 seats picked up by the Democrats but it will be anywhere between 19 and 59. They have a 6 in 7 chance of flipping the house and a 1 in 7 shot at flipping the Senate.
Wait. Are the children of diplomats and foreign ministers granted citizenship on the basis of being born here?
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Wait. Are the children of diplomats and foreign ministers granted citizenship on the basis of being born here?
- Doc
No, because they are not subject to US jurisdiction.
Soooo... Illegals who haven't taken an oath of citizenship or have allegiance to a foreign government are different how?
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
