RedDenver Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 9 minutes ago, Landlord said: Per my (limited) understanding, it sadly doesn't seem quite certain that Trump's EO would directly contradict the 14th amendment. I'm also not sure there is any actual past legal precedent as far as illegal immigrant's children? The Constitution is quite clear on the word "born", so I don't see any way that Trump's EO could supercede it. Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 17 minutes ago, Landlord said: Per my (limited) understanding, it sadly doesn't seem quite certain that Trump's EO would directly contradict the 14th amendment. I'm also not sure there is any actual past legal precedent as far as illegal immigrant's children? Here is a good piece that makes the case the argument Trump and his ilk are relying on to make their EO constitutional is deliberately misconstrued bunk. He mentions that there are a couple of serious academics who agree with this line of thought but literally just a couple. it appears almost everyone else thinks it's a bad argument. The Fourteenth Amendment Can’t Be Revoked by Executive Order 1 Link to comment
whateveritis1224 Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 5 minutes ago, knapplc said: So how long until we have to carry around cards that prove we've been pureblood Americans for x amount of generations to avoid detention or deportation? Link to comment
Moiraine Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 I’m starting to wonder if McCain was blackmailing Graham into being a decent human being. 2 1 Link to comment
ZRod Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 21 minutes ago, knapplc said: Finally a Senator willing to put his face on an issue that really isn't a problem and doesn't need fixing. I'm glad we are distracted from realnissies like the deficit, Russian interference, healthcare, better tax reform, consumer rights, social safety nets, drug prices, common sense gun laws, etc. 3 Link to comment
Landlord Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 idk how much it actually matters, but per wikipedia: During the debate over the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, he [The author of the 14th amendment] argued for including the phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof:" [The 14th amendment] will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person.[2] Link to comment
Moiraine Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 13 minutes ago, ZRod said: Finally a Senator willing to put his face on an issue that really isn't a problem and doesn't need fixing. I'm glad we are distracted from realnissies like the deficit, Russian interference, healthcare, better tax reform, consumer rights, social safety nets, drug prices, common sense gun laws, etc. Not only is it not a problem, it’s the opposite of that. Grad school and businesses are filled with skilled workers from China and India and Africa and they aren’t stealing jobs they are just qualified. U.S. businesses are getting rich off of them. We are going to lose a lot of smart people if this happens. It takes a long time to become a citizen so a lot fewer smart people are going to want to come here. But the people who are desparate to survive are going to keep trying to come. The only problem with these people is to Republicans because they tend to vote Democrat. I just hope if this happens it’s through an executive order so it will go away with Trump. Link to comment
Cdog923 Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 4 minutes ago, Landlord said: idk how much it actually matters, but per wikipedia: "Per Wikipedia" Link to comment
Ratt Mhule Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 35 minutes ago, knapplc said: And Im apparently the one going to hell because Im not religious. If heaven is filled with scumbags like this count me out. Prolife my a$$! Link to comment
Landlord Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 10 minutes ago, Cdog923 said: "Per Wikipedia" Okay, Per Wikipedia, sourced from the Library of Congress' records: http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=11 1 Link to comment
Cdog923 Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 Just now, Landlord said: Okay, Per Wikipedia, sourced from the Library of Congress' records: http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=11 That's better. Link to comment
RedDenver Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 43 minutes ago, Landlord said: idk how much it actually matters, but per wikipedia: Doesn't really matter who wanted what in which Amendment because only what's in the actual Amendment got ratified by the States. Link to comment
Landlord Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 2 minutes ago, RedDenver said: Doesn't really matter who wanted what in which Amendment because only what's in the actual Amendment got ratified by the States. The author argued for including the phrase, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof", which is in the amendment, precisely for the purpose of making a distinction towards people not here legally. The argument being that illegal immigrants are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Right? Or am I reading/understanding this wrong? Link to comment
Recommended Posts