It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump Ready to Stop the Anchor Baby Loophole

page: 17
47
<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 05:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: tanstaafl

Yes, so anchor baby citizens who are 18 and not felons get to vote.

Not if they agree to waive the privilege (it is not a Right) in exchange for being allowed to stay and retain their Citizenship (in all other respects).

They already have it. They do not need to do anything to retain it. The reason why doesn't matter, the government gave the citizenship.




posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl I see 'subject to jurisdiction' as meaning you can be arrested and jailed for violating laws, whether or not you have any citizenship of or allegience to another country. So, everybody in the US minus the diplomat exceptions. If you're in the gray bar hotel, you are experiencing jurisdictional subjection, no?



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl


Rights (capital 'R' Rights) are not 'granted'.

For that reason, voting is, and can be nothing other than a government granted privilege.

You are correct in that voting itself is not an inalienable right. It is endowed by the government. However, the right to have a say in society is indeed a right endowed by a Creator and thus inalienable. Voting is how we chose to express that right.

Either way, though, we are splitting hairs here.


Really? You really believe that?

I have never utilized any of your precious 'social services'.

I have also only voted a few times - and will again in 2020, for the first time since 2008 (when I voted for Ron Paul).

The very best advantages of Citizenship come from being allowed to pursue your dreams, whatever they may be.

I believe you have. You have driven on public roads, correct? You have used public schools, correct? You have mailed a letter, correct? There are more public services than welfare and medicare.

But you still have that option to utilize those services if needed, even if you don't now.

The ability to pursue one's dream is granted not by citizenship, but by legal residence. Anyone who comes to this country legally is allowed to follow their dreams within the law, just like citizens. Citizenship, however, includes the right to have a voice in the government and the right to the same privileges and services allowed other citizens. That is what we are discussing: who gets those extra benefits of voting and social services? No one is denying (at least I hope they aren't) that any person here legally is protected from tyranny and oppression.

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: TheBoomersRBusted


If you're in the gray bar hotel, you are experiencing jurisdictional subjection, no?

No. You are experiencing law enforcement. That is a different subject. You have been imprisoned by those who are under the jurisdiction of the municipality, state, or Federal government.

One cannot be arrested by an Ohio cop in Nevada, for instance. It's not because they are not under jurisdiction; it is that the officer is out of his/her jurisdiction. Officers do not have the right to arrest outside their jurisdiction, unless temporary jurisdiction is granted by the government whose territory they are in.

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 07:34 PM
link   
a reply to: TheBoomersRBusted

Then you would be wrong. Without the 1924 law Native Americans can be arrested and are subject to US laws off reservation, but their children born off reservation are not American Citizens because they are not under US jurisdiction, even off reservation. That is settled case law by the US SC.



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 09:23 PM
link   
I think the criteria for "subject to jurisdiction" should be eligibility for the draft.

If you would have grounds to refuse on the basis of not being an American national, then you are not "subject to jurisdiction".

That would make things fairly simple.



Anyone have a better criteria?





originally posted by: TheRedneck

The ability to pursue one's dream is granted not by citizenship, but by legal residence. Anyone who comes to this country legally is allowed to follow their dreams within the law, just like citizens. Citizenship, however, includes the right to have a voice in the government and the right to the same privileges and services allowed other citizens. That is what we are discussing: who gets those extra benefits of voting and social services? No one is denying (at least I hope they aren't) that any person here legally is protected from tyranny and oppression.

TheRedneck


You can still pursue your dreams even without citizenship, or legal residence.

A person could pursue them even without being in America.



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Mexico is poor, but it's not a zombie apocalypse.

Honduras is starting to become one, but that's their own dam fault. Megabreeders reap what they sow. They've screwed their own selves over....... literally.



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 05:30 AM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Legal permanent resident should be the criteria.



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 12:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Legal permanent resident should be the criteria.


www.eb5investors.com...

"Like U.S. citizens, male permanent residents between the ages of 18 and 25 must register with Selective Service. Registering with Selective Service makes these men eligible to be drafted into the U.S. military in the event that the United States goes to war. "



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 08:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
They already have it. They do not need to do anything to retain it. The reason why doesn't matter, the government gave the citizenship.

If it was given under false pretenses (See AOC) or under an unConstitutional law it can be revoked.

Kind of a moot point, I'm sure Trump isn't contemplating revoking anything ex post facto, just putting an end to the practice (and it's about time).



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 08:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheBoomersRBusted
a reply to: tanstaafl I see 'subject to jurisdiction' as meaning you can be arrested and jailed for violating laws, whether or not you have any citizenship of or allegience to another country.

Don't be silly. Putting those words into the amendment, if that is all they meant, would be redundant and totally unnecessary.



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 08:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
I believe you have. You have driven on public roads, correct? You have used public schools, correct? You have mailed a letter, correct? There are more public services than welfare and medicare.

Really? Seriously? Sorry, not even in the same ballpark.

I pay taxes that pay for the public schools. I pay taxes that pay for the roads. I pat for the tamps when I send something through he USPS.

There is not even a remote comparison to a service that I pay for, and partaking of a handout that is provided as the result of extortion and theft.

If you don't understand the difference between government welfare and people paying for the services they utilize, then I guess we have nothing further to discuss.



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 10:47 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

Yes, you pay taxes for those things; so do I. We also pay taxes to support welfare recipients. Everything the government does is paid for by taxes; the government has no other form of income.

It sounds like you are against any social services that support the poor. I am not; I am only against social services to support the poor that are mismanaged. Most of ours are. One huge area of mismanagement (and I think direct abuse) is to use the funding for those services to support people who are not (or in the context of this thread, should not be) American citizens.

Incidentally, I don't get to Georgia that much, so I don't use their roads a lot... but some of my Federal tax money is used to maintain them. In some circles, that is called "charity." I prefer the term "socialist." "Socialist" is not always a bad thing. It is just something that must not be used as the basis for an economy. Overused and abused, it leads to situations like Venezuela is experiencing.

You're welcome for the roads. And thank you for the Alabama roads.

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 06:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
I disagree. Something along the lines of "foreign dignitaries" would be much less ambiguous.


'Foreign dignitaries' could be construed to be anyone, a celebrity could be a dignitary.

Good we agree. Now would you agree that previously granting citizenship at birth is not then a guarantee of Constitutional requirement and could simply be in addition to that required by the Constitution?


To me it's clear that the 14th grants birthright.

Trump isn't doing anything outside of normal Executive powers...


If Trump tries to limit birthright it will go to the Supreme Court where, in my opinion, it will be overridden.

Correct. Dual citizenship is dual jurisdiction.

In reality, whichever country you reside in at the time would exercise primary jurisdiction, but Italy could in theory pass a law that placed a mandate on all citizens and then prosecute you for breaking it while in the US if you were to visit Italy.


The problem with that is the law shouldn't be capricious.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 06:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
No, there is such a thing as "court standing." One cannot just file a complaint against any person anywhere at any time; the court must recognize standing to legally file the claim. As an example, if someone tricked you out of a large sum of money...


Glad you brought up money. A citizen taxpayer, a municipality or a state could argue the money they spend on birthright children's education should not be paid since, using your agreement, they are not citizens. Why has this not happened, ever?



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 06:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
How would they get standing? I have no standing to file a case.


See above. Really simple.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 06:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl
Birthright doesn't mean what you think it means in that source.

It is talking about the Citizenship of a Parent, or possibly a Grandparent.


He specifically mentioned Mexico which has jus soli, same as us. Look it up.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 08:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
We also pay taxes to support welfare recipients. Everything the government does is paid for by taxes; the government has no other form of income.

Please stop. The government has no 'income' - it is merely the recipient of large scale legalized theft racket, just like all governments.

To use the word income, which is what is used to denote the pay received by someone in exchange for a hard days work - is an insult to all people who work for a living.


It sounds like you are against any social services that support the poor.

Amazing... when ignorance improperly frames the question, ignorance is usually the resulting answer.

Allow me to reframe the question into a statement.

I am against legalized theft wherein money is taken at gunpoint from one person - you, me, anyone - and given to someone else - but only after the thieves keep 90+% for themselves.


I am not; I am only against social services to support the poor that are mismanaged.

Which means you are against all of it, because it is all mismanaged, and in fact, I posit that it can be no other way.


Incidentally, I don't get to Georgia that much, so I don't use their roads a lot... but some of my Federal tax money is used to maintain them.

Prove it.


In some circles, that is called "charity." I prefer the term "socialist."

Both are wrong. Our system is broken, but taxing something (in this case gas) that is directly involved in the use of something else that must be maintained (roads) is more along the lines of a use tax, which I am not against, because it is voluntary. Use it, pay the tax. If you don't want to pay the tax, don't use it (or find a way around it, like avoiding toll roads).


"Socialist" is not always a bad thing.

Yes... it is. Because it is based on the use of force.

Before government got involved in charity, the poor were taken care of by voluntary charities (mostly local churches, but others too), and while not perfect, they did a much better job of it than the government (much lower overhead for one thing).

Governments involvement was a huge power grab, plain and simple. And look at the result. The government promotes policies that perpetuate and even grow the problem, rather than trying to solve it.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


'Foreign dignitaries' could be construed to be anyone, a celebrity could be a dignitary.

As far as that is concerned, "dog" could be construed to include cats. One can "construe" anything if one wants it bad enough, just as you are doing with the word "jurisdiction."


To me it's clear that the 14th grants birthright.

To me, it is clear the 14th Amendment does not grant birthright citizenship to children of illegal aliens.


If Trump tries to limit birthright it will go to the Supreme Court where, in my opinion, it will be overridden.

For reasons already specified, I believe it will not. I guess we'll see.


The problem with that is the law shouldn't be capricious.

Agreed, but I don't see what is capricious about what I posted. Citizenship comes with obligations. Dual citizenship comes with dual obligations.

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


Glad you brought up money. A citizen taxpayer, a municipality or a state could argue the money they spend on birthright children's education should not be paid since, using your agreement, they are not citizens. Why has this not happened, ever?

As has already been explained at length, equal protection applies to all people, not just all citizens. Part of the equal protection includes public education as defined by the court because it is nigh impossible to determine who is and is not a citizen for that purpose. Birthright citizenship applies to all people born on US soil and under US jurisdiction... a different standard.

TheRedneck




top topics



 
47
<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in

join