tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post8586450310859807469..comments2023-10-18T07:02:38.712-04:00Comments on This Land: New tactic: suing the PresidentUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger82125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-31458119653537430432010-03-24T17:09:50.543-04:002010-03-24T17:09:50.543-04:00fuck everyone who commented, jesus christ you, let...fuck everyone who commented, jesus christ you, let's just murder all the immigrants why don't we. i bet you'd love that idea you fucks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-28059699693448085122009-11-11T18:58:42.512-05:002009-11-11T18:58:42.512-05:00so stop hiring illegals than...isn't that what...so stop hiring illegals than...isn't that what america needs?someone to do their dirty work no one else wants to do, for less than minimum wage, and no health benefits?stop complaining that there are no jobs, blaming the latinos, and get your info straight...illegals can't get welfare or any other government assistance...not even file taxes...duhAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-54949357235937384002009-06-21T16:07:47.714-04:002009-06-21T16:07:47.714-04:00They are suing the wrong person. Sue the parents w...They are suing the wrong person. Sue the parents who broke the law and left their kids to fend for themselves.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-27411881550845111502009-06-20T09:19:01.627-04:002009-06-20T09:19:01.627-04:00@Anonymous said...
"and subject to the juris...@Anonymous said...<br /><br />"and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"?<br />--> are you ever going to put it in or use it in context...<br /><br />The writers of this particular clause of the fourteenth amendment, US Senators Jacob Howard and Lyman Trubmull, stated:<br /><br /><b>The provision is, that ‘all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.’ That means ‘subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.’ What do we mean by ‘complete jurisdiction thereof?’ Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.</b><br /><br />You can read the minutes of the Congressional record taken from the day of debate here:<br /><br /><a href="http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=11" rel="nofollow">Congressional Minutes from the national record, 39th Congress, 1st Session,</a><br /><br />This was added to help solidify and concretize the relationship of "state citizenship" vis-a-vis "U.S. (federal) citizenship. Additionally, its inclusion was meant to assuage the concerns of various parties regarding the citizenship rights of Native Americans. The Fourteenth Amendment continued to affirm legislation that denied citizenship rights to Native Americans.<br /><br />Furthermore, despite claimed "actions of a few liberal activist judges" who interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment, in reality, the Supreme Court (the ultimate arbiter of Constitutional interpretation), made several rulings on this very matter concerning foreigners, illegals, etc. and the citizenship birthright of their offspring.<br /><br />In 1898 SCOTUS ruled in United States v Wong Kim Ark, that children of non-citizen Chinese, born on U.S. soil, were indeed citizens. <br /><br /><i>Congress' intent in including the qualifying phrase ''and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,'' was apparently to exclude from the reach of the language children born of diplomatic representatives of a foreign state and children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation, both recognized exceptions to the common-law rule of acquired citizenship by birth, as well as children of members of Indian tribes subject to tribal laws. </i><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=112&invol=94#99" rel="nofollow">Citation and notes here</a>Ajays Barhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07061410602929804045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-76923225300144227222009-06-20T00:58:26.253-04:002009-06-20T00:58:26.253-04:00"All persons born or naturalized in the Unite..."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."<br /><br />No one has mentioned that the word "and" is used and not "or" subject to the jurisdiction....That means that both things have to be true, not just one.<br /><br />There are instances where political individuals (embassies and whatnot) are in the U.S. and have children. Some of the offices, homes or apartments of these families are given different definitions of jurisdiction. <br /><br />We've all seen one tv show or another that mentions "diplomatic immunity". That is when they are not subject to our jurisdiction. (The embassies of foreign countries are governed by the law of their country...not ours. Just like our embassies are governed by U.S. laws in other countries.)<br /><br />My brother-in-law was born in Japan because his father was stationed there while serving the U.S. military. He carried a dual citizenship until he was 18. At that time, he had a decision to make. He chose the U.S. <br /><br />Unfortunately, the children of these people facing deportation should stay with their folks and make the same decision when they turn 18. And should be allowed to return to the U.S. on their own without facing public ridicule.<br /><br />My feelings are that these children were blessed to be born here. Just as I was. But cursed because their parents weren't willing to follow the rules of society. They have a social security number and that will benefit them when they are no longer minors.Tracynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-45390009020124165992009-06-19T12:12:43.340-04:002009-06-19T12:12:43.340-04:00This is absolutely absurb! How about if the Ameri...This is absolutely absurb! How about if the American people file a law suit against OBAMA, BUSH, CLINTON, BUSH and others for NOT PROTECTING OUR BORDERS AND ENFORCING CURRENT IMMIGRATION LAW!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-2445528789344819282009-06-19T11:37:52.701-04:002009-06-19T11:37:52.701-04:00America is over, and has been for some time. That...America is over, and has been for some time. That great country you believed in in elementary school is gone. Get over it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-76325050170380640632009-06-19T09:57:14.476-04:002009-06-19T09:57:14.476-04:00I feel sorry for the children however, their paren...I feel sorry for the children however, their parents should never have put them in this position to begin with. Until they are 18 years of age they should have to return with their parents. Then at the age of consent they can return to America...the children...Legally. It's a hard world and no one ever said it would be fair.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-845465277736082562009-06-19T08:26:20.438-04:002009-06-19T08:26:20.438-04:00Anonymous said...
Hey, ask to see BO's birth ...Anonymous said... <br />Hey, ask to see BO's birth certificqte too.<br /><br />June 18, 2009 10:53 PM <br /><br />Lets see yours! Anyone who thinks a non citizen without a legal birth certificate can be President is stupid or brainwashed by Fox tv. He's been investigated and thoroughly vetted. This is a non issue that I don't blame him for ignoring.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-35904583815980022742009-06-18T22:53:59.458-04:002009-06-18T22:53:59.458-04:00Hey, ask to see BO's birth certificqte too.Hey, ask to see BO's birth certificqte too.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-32603576580673104992009-06-18T17:45:47.706-04:002009-06-18T17:45:47.706-04:00An interpretation of what many of this board are t...An interpretation of what many of this board are thinking..."Things were better when white protestants ruled the country and everyone else 'knew their place'. It was especially great here in the deep south when we kept those that didn't look like on one side of town. Now, white protestants are becoming a minority and we don't like others who don't speak our language, especially with without a southern accent. So I will take it out on their kids since they are a 'lesser human' than me, and if the rest of the community doesn't follow suit soon, I'll just go out and shoot some people just to make my point." Come on admit it, that is that many of you are really trying to say.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-49673617023874346642009-06-18T17:10:54.875-04:002009-06-18T17:10:54.875-04:00Okay, I'll try one last time...
Why is the ph...Okay, I'll try one last time...<br /><br />Why is the phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" included in the language. Why do you and other libs ignore this phrase? <br /><br />---------<br />Okay, I'll try this one last time, as I interpret it it means those born in the U.S or are naturalized are subject to its laws. It makes no reference to who is and isn't within that jurisdiction or the geographic boundaries or legal boundaries. it's ambiguous.<br /><br />So again my question is why is this important in this discussion. Please put it context. in other words, explain it's signifigance as it pertains to children born in the U.S. as opposed to another child born int he U.S.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-23672913880690114672009-06-18T17:04:42.991-04:002009-06-18T17:04:42.991-04:00"Fortunately your open borders point of view ..."Fortunately your open borders point of view is one clearly in the minority."<br />- No sorry I don't believe in open borders at all. I think undocumented immigrants should be sent to their countries of origin. That would include children. U.S. citizens that are born in the U.S are not immigrants, have no country to go 'home' to other than the U.S.. "Anchor Babies" respectfully and appropriately refered to as U.S. born U.S. citizens are not fodder for your political opinions and I would assume that since the majoruity of eleced leaders do not implement polices you are sympathetic to that you are the minority...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-5301752179870175162009-06-18T17:04:29.625-04:002009-06-18T17:04:29.625-04:00Okay, I'll try one last time...
Why is the ph...Okay, I'll try one last time...<br /><br />Why is the phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" included in the language. Why do you and other libs ignore this phrase? <br /><br />Again, if someone born here regardless of the status of their parents automatically had citizenship status then this phrase would be completely unncessary. Why is it there?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-21969588483253308022009-06-18T16:57:59.816-04:002009-06-18T16:57:59.816-04:00"The term "anchor baby" is used to ..."The term "anchor baby" is used to describe an undocumented immigrant who has a child on U.S. soil for the sole purpose of creating a citizen and reducing the likelyhood of being deported due to the government's avoidance of breaking up families."<br /><br />Using your definition, and actually it is a good one other than the euphamistic "undocumented immigrant" part, I just don't see how this is derogatory. <br /><br />Oh well, I suppose that the conversation is becoming tired at this point. Fortunately your open borders point of view is one clearly in the minority.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-17747411959265637712009-06-18T16:53:29.958-04:002009-06-18T16:53:29.958-04:00All persons born or naturalized in the United Stat...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. <br /><br />--> So basically if you are born here you are a citizenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-67946825369692001872009-06-18T16:43:23.684-04:002009-06-18T16:43:23.684-04:00The law is the law. Perspective and empathy don...The law is the law. Perspective and empathy don't enter into it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-69351440675578880462009-06-18T16:42:26.404-04:002009-06-18T16:42:26.404-04:00"and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"..."and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"?<br />--> are you ever going to put it in or use it in context...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-43538052578066122812009-06-18T16:40:15.863-04:002009-06-18T16:40:15.863-04:00Not completely true. Some indeed are illegals (or ...Not completely true. Some indeed are illegals (or as you euphemistaclly call them "undocumented immigrants") -- they were born in other countries and brought here by their illegal parents.<br /><br />- yes i call them undocumented immigrants because humans aren't t "illegal" and should not be referred to in that way. Furthermore immigration is a civil issue not a criminal issue.<br />And no "anchor babies" as you referred to thm are never here illegally. They are all born in the U.S. and they are all citizens.<br />The term "anchor baby" is used to describe an undocumented immigrant who has a child on U.S. soil for the sole purpose of creating a citizen and reducing the likelyhood of being deported due to the government's avoidance of breaking up families. An undocumented immigrant who's child is born in their nation of origin, would not be the parent of an "anchor baby" and the child would have no legal claim to live here or claim to citizenship in the U.S.<br />Some "activist judge may have misinterpreted the 1th ammendement" but the law is the law and as it stands these children born in the U.S. are u.S. citizens.<br />Unlike you these so called activist judges can control their emotions and not use derrogatory terms when discussing or deciding on difficult policy. And that's why they decide the policy and not people like you who cant evaluate and put the order of law in perspectiveAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-42506780444159881842009-06-18T16:33:41.798-04:002009-06-18T16:33:41.798-04:00anonymnous at 4:29 and others...
Are you ever goi...anonymnous at 4:29 and others...<br /><br />Are you ever going to address the<br /><br />"and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"?<br /><br />Just because it's the law, doesn't mean it is right. Anchor babies are indeed legal, but they shouldn't be if interpreted accurately.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-69024365054557962592009-06-18T16:29:01.519-04:002009-06-18T16:29:01.519-04:00"The population of children you descibed abov..."The population of children you descibed above are not here illegally."<br /><br />Not completely true. Some indeed are illegals (or as you euphemistaclly call them "undocumented immigrants") -- they were born in other countries and brought here by their illegal parents.<br /><br />The rest are "legal" only because an activist judge misinterpreted the 14th amendment to advance his agenda rather than strictly interpret the Constitution. So we all suffer because of badly interpreted law. <br /><br />Both cost us a lot of money. At the very least we shouldn't be paying for the illegals born in other countries.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-52996403720795949082009-06-18T16:27:59.401-04:002009-06-18T16:27:59.401-04:00Any child born to two illegal aliens would ALSO be...Any child born to two illegal aliens would ALSO be an illegal alien and subject to deportation along with their parents.<br /><br />I believe this scheme is eminently fair and logical and impossible to poke holes in, unless you are one of those people (like Franco) who just don't give a **** about the law.<br /><br />Well I give a *** about the law. First of all the law currently does not use the criteria you have suggested. And I support that law and I disagree with you. I clearly respect the law, because I agree with the law. You have suggested that we CHANGE THE LAW. Any claim you make that anyone who disagrees with your proposal has no respect for the law is ridiculous. What you are proposing is not the law, just a suggestion. It is simple to poke holes in your proposal. There are human rights to consider. Now the law might allow one human to own another human and that had to be changed. The law violated basic human rights. Similarly, denying a person the right to live where they are born is unnaccetable. It doesn't matter what crime their parents committed. Every human deserves a clean slate when they are born. Every person born in this country deserves the same basic opportunities as any other person. The law shouldn't offer one child protection and not another because of their parents choices or place in life.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-13997821210420440992009-06-18T16:16:42.851-04:002009-06-18T16:16:42.851-04:00Deport the anchor baby kids to. They should never ...Deport the anchor baby kids to. They should never have been allowed to stay here. <br />- Are you on crack? What do you mean they should have never been allowed to stay here. They were born here. They are citizens<br /><br />In CMS millions are spent each year to educate these illegals.<br />- You are lying they are not here illegally. They were born here and they are citizens<br /><br />If taxpayers knew how much illegal kids cost them they would be up in arms. <br />- well there is a difference between a minor and an adult & there is a difference between an undocumented immigrant and a U.S. citizen. The population of children you descibed above are not here illegally. They are born in theU.S. and they are legal citizens. Whatever it costs to educate our children who are citizens is what it costs. If it's all about saving money we could cut public school altogether. I'm not sure the result would be very good though.<br /><br /><br />School taxes could be cut 10% if we got rid of them.<br /><br />I have no sympathy for them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-73607581813118877342009-06-18T16:11:10.613-04:002009-06-18T16:11:10.613-04:00"I believe that one can never be punished for..."I believe that one can never be punished for sins of a father."<br /><br />Punished?!? How is a child punished when they are given citizenship to the country of origin of their parents rather than the United States. Is a child born in Mexico punished because they are not given citizenship in the United States?<br /><br />No other country awards citizenship to anyone born in their country regardless of the status of their parents. It's suicidal in a modern welfare state such as the United States where activist judges have mandated a whole host of entitlements from the taxpayers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2628953912605985656.post-13087946926136601162009-06-18T16:06:25.417-04:002009-06-18T16:06:25.417-04:003:33 PM -- If one of your parents is a US citizen,...3:33 PM -- If one of your parents is a US citizen, as in your case, then you are a US citizen. And since YOU are a US citizen, your son and daughter would also be US citizens. Basically, each person born in this country would inherit the <i>greater</i> status of their two parents. So:<br /><br />FC + FC = FC<br />FC + RA = FC<br />FC + IA = FC<br />RA + RA = RA<br />RA + IA = RA<br />IA + IA = IA<br /><br />where FC is Full Citizen, RA is Resident Alien, and IA is Illegal Alien.<br /><br />So, a full US citizen could have a child with an illegal alien, and the child would be a full citizen. The illegal alien, of course, would be subject to deportation at any time if they did not follow legal channels to become a resident alien or a full citizen. Any child born to two illegal aliens would ALSO be an illegal alien and subject to deportation along with their parents.<br /><br />I believe this scheme is eminently fair and logical and impossible to poke holes in, unless you are one of those people (like Franco) who just don't give a **** about the law.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com