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: 2
47
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2019 @ 10:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Duderino

originally posted by: xuenchen
White House senior adviser Stephen Miller says they're getting closer to an Executive Order that will stop the Anchor Baby onslaught !!


Oh Stephen Miller, that rascal! He's like the Himmler to his Hitler; the Shaoqi to his Zedong; the Beria to his Stalin.

These two guys are going places...

...like The Hague.


Got source ?




posted on Aug, 25 2019 @ 11:02 PM
link   
On one hand, Trump is right—there is no sensible reason why the accident of one's birth location should determine one's political, civil and social rights. On the other, there's even less reason why a child born in the same place as another should receive fewer legal rights based simply on the accident of their parents' rights.

So long as we're rethinking fundamental precepts of constitutional law—and there is no legal basis for rescinding birthright citizenship, that's patently absurd—we should be moving toward the only sensible view: equal rights for all within a territorial jurisdiction.



posted on Aug, 25 2019 @ 11:11 PM
link   
Awesome! Now, just backdate that law at least 20 years and problem solved.

There is a thing called "the spirit of the law". It is important as it establishes the context in which the law is intended.

It is important to remember that this, the 14th amendment, was adopted in 1868. We had just fought the civil war, one of the bloodiest wars in this Nation's history. Many former slaves fought along with the North for freedom. The government determined that these people, and their children whom were borne here, were US citizens and should be treated as such. This amendment was meant to confer citizenship, and all the rights and privileges thereto, to the people who were brought here against their will but still fought on the side of freedom for this nation, and their children.

This amendment was never meant to be abused the way it has been for far too long.



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 01:04 AM
link   
One argument we will hear is why did it take the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 to make Native Americans Citizens when the 14th Amendment was already in effect ? 😧😧

Indian Citizenship Act


The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, also known as the Snyder Act, was proposed by Representative Homer P. Snyder (R) of New York and granted full U.S. citizenship to the indigenous peoples of the United States, called "Indians" in this Act. While the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution defines as citizens any persons born in the U.S. and subject to its jurisdiction, the amendment had been interpreted to not apply to Native people. The act was signed into law by President Calvin Coolidge on June 2, 1924. It was enacted partially in recognition of the thousands of Native Americans who served in the armed forces during the First World War.



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 01:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: MisterSpock
You know what....

That actually sounds like a twilight zone episode...]

A whole town full of my children from all over the world(when I was in the service).

A town full of so many wonderful children of mine....yet equally filled with all the women I impregnated and left......

That's good TV right there....


Pfftttt... Small player...

I have a whole planet full of my inklings... 😉🤪

Laglings and Laglets spread across all the 7 continents...

We breed like rabbits...

Buwhahaaaaaa...

Lags
edit on 26-8-2019 by Lagomorphe because: Lagomorph = Rabbit but I have the French version... So get your wet celery out... R.I.P. Rene from Allo Allo...



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 02:18 AM
link   
I think a baby born abroad should by default be considered a citizen of the country the mother has citizenship in. I've always thought it strange that this is not the case in the US. The way US birthright laws have been abused, something needs to be done.

I think it's f'd up that someone would go to another country to have a baby just so they could abuse that country's welfare system and that's exactly what they do. The mother and child become our financial burden and they could care less about the burdens they put on others. Does anyone ever wonder why they never claim married status and keep spitting out bambino's? So papa can go and make the bread while mom sits at home collecting gov benefits that we pay for. Worthless lazy freeloaders with # ethics and morals is what they are. It pisses me off to no end that the left defends this BS and wants us to pay for them, when we're having a tough enough time supporting our own families. Screw them.



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 02:18 AM
link   
So now he doesn't even want brown people who are born here to live here.
Nice one.
He wants to end the laws that say if you're born in a country you are a citizen of that country even though thats the way it is all over the planet.
What an idiot.
Hey were his parents US citizens? Can we get rid of him that easily?
Was he even born? I think he hatched myself.



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 02:20 AM
link   
a reply to: MisterSpock

Where is that?



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 02:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
So now he doesn't even want brown people who are born here to live here.
Nice one.
He wants to end the laws that say if you're born in a country you are a citizen of that country even though thats the way it is all over the planet.
What an idiot.
Hey were his parents US citizens? Can we get rid of him that easily?
Was he even born? I think he hatched myself.


“Brown people”

Racist much?



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 02:23 AM
link   
“All immigrants are brown people”
Did I get that right leftist?

Or are you dumb enough to think “all ILLEGAL immigrants are brown people”?

Or even worse, “all anchor-babies are brown people”

Disgusting



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 02:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme

He wants to end the laws that say if you're born in a country you are a citizen of that country even though thats the way it is all over the planet.
What an idiot.



Yet another one of your lies. There's 195 countries on the planet and only 30 (give or take a few) of them have birthright laws. Who's the idiot?



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 02:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
So now he doesn't even want brown people who are born here to live here.
Nice one.
He wants to end the laws that say if you're born in a country you are a citizen of that country even though thats the way it is all over the planet.
What an idiot.
Hey were his parents US citizens? Can we get rid of him that easily?
Was he even born? I think he hatched myself.


He/His/Him... are you again spouting about your deep hate for your elected president?

Nothing better to add as usual Silly... you live up to your name bigly.👍👍

Have a nice life.

Lags



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 03:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: mtnshredder

originally posted by: Sillyolme

He wants to end the laws that say if you're born in a country you are a citizen of that country even though thats the way it is all over the planet.
What an idiot.



Yet another one of your lies. There's 195 countries on the planet and only 30 (give or take a few) of them have birthright laws. Who's the idiot?


“IT” is... BIG time...

Probably had a sheltered life when “IT” was in “ITS” younger years...

Never tried to open “ITS” eyes or take off the blinkers since...!

Never brings anything of value here as a user generated site anyway.

I tend to ignore “IT” generally as “IT” is full of hot air that blows away with the breeze quickly...

Watch how “IT” will try to report this post acting as a victim when “IT” is the biggest troll around here hardly ever giving sound and solid concrete evidence about “ITS” so called thoughts.

Shame really that my post will probably be obliterated (Although I hope not!?)

ETA : As usual and no doubt “IT” will probably come back and “Machine gun” so to speak, many posters without taking “ITS” time to do a little reading, deep thinking and research...

As usual...

Lags
edit on 26-8-2019 by Lagomorphe because: “IT”



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 03:10 AM
link   
It's all fun and games til a future president tries to change the Constitution to get rid of your precious 2nd amendment. You are opening the door for future presidents to treat the Constitution like toilet paper you do realize that don't you? I thought the Constitution was the Holy Grail to "real Americans" which anchor babies are according to the Constitution.



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 03:30 AM
link   
I was born in India...... some people say I am Indian, however I was conceived by

a French/English woman (two hundred years of traced ancestory) and my father

was English. The only connection I have with India is being born there ? My dna

is English/French?

Surely ones heritage comes from inherited dna and not the earth one stands on








edit on 26-8-2019 by eletheia because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 04:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
So now he doesn't even want brown people who are born here to live here.
Nice one.
He wants to end the laws that say if you're born in a country you are a citizen of that country even though thats the way it is all over the planet.
What an idiot.
Hey were his parents US citizens? Can we get rid of him that easily?
Was he even born? I think he hatched myself.



oof. You really shot yourself in the foot here.

Some things you say I do agree with, and can tell you ain't no dumb-dumb. But my god, come on.

It doesn't matter if you're black, white, brown or purple. THAT is not the issue here. Stop making everything about the color of one's skin; you're only fueling the fire.



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 04:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: xuenchen




Text of the 14th Amendment
Section 1.
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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Bold is mine.

I'd have to say, on the face of it, that this move would be unconstitutional.


A foreigner, whilst in the US, is not sbject to US juristiction.

The SC way back in the 19th century ruled that the qualifying statement about juristiction was meant to exclude "“children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.”. Subsequent to that American Indians were denied citizenship because their allegiances were to tribe and not the USA. That decision required a new law to overturn it, The Indian Citizenship Act in the 1920's. The 14th Amendment was not enough.

The language in the 14 Amendment was based on the 19th Century Civil Rights Act - "“all persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power”.

Subsequent cases, e.g Wong Kim Ark, seem to give support for the other side of the argument.

I guess if the Govt. is now investigating all potential avenues they will base any EO on sound legal standing.
I think whatever the outcome, it's a win for the US. Either the anchor baby issue is ended OR it becomes fully settled.




edit on 26/8/2019 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 06:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia

I was born in India...... some people say I am Indian, however I was conceived by

a French/English woman (two hundred years of traced ancestory) and my father

was English. The only connection I have with India is being born there ? My dna

is English/French?

Surely ones heritage comes from inherited dna and not the earth one stands on









You are Indian and I hope proud?

Care to share some HOT curry recipes mate?

Lags



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 06:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: xuenchen




Text of the 14th Amendment
Section 1.
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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Bold is mine.

I'd have to say, on the face of it, that this move would be unconstitutional.



Yes on face of it using today's incoherent run-on english.

Operative or must be true also statement, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" use of the word "and" is critical clue that this must also be true in order for the first part of sentence to work.

If one completely removed the words "and subject to jurisdiction thereof" then you would have exactly today's interpretation - so why are they there then? its to modify the preceding portion of sentence to have to make subject to jurisdiction also be true at same time. Our forefathers did not waste words and used english as an art form not a bludgeon.

The same mistake is made regards second amendment and its commas by most if not all anti's.

Parsing - its what the left doe's! not that you're left - its just what they do.
edit on 26-8-2019 by Phoenix because: add comment



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 06:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Phoenix


What part of the first sentence is 'run on'?



new topics

top topics



 
47
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join