- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Trump Releases 11-Point Campaign Plan. Are These Feasible?
Posted on 10/31/23 at 8:58 am to Cuz413
Posted on 10/31/23 at 8:58 am to Cuz413
Ann Coulter has gone over the anchor baby thing many times:
In fact, this alleged right derives only from a footnote slyly slipped into a Supreme Court opinion by Justice Brennan in 1982. You might say it snuck in when no one was looking, and now we have to let it stay.
The 14th Amendment was added after the Civil War in order to overrule the Supreme Court's Dred Scott decision, which had held that black slaves were not citizens of the United States. The precise purpose of the amendment was to stop sleazy Southern states from denying citizenship rights to newly freed slaves -many of whom had roots in this country longer than a lot of white people.
The amendment guaranteed that freed slaves would have all the privileges of citizenship by providing: "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."
The drafters of the 14th amendment had no intention of conferring citizenship on the children of aliens who happened to be born in the U.S. (For my younger readers, back in those days, people cleaned their own houses and raised their own kids.)
Inasmuch as America was not the massive welfare state operating as a magnet for malingerers, frauds and cheats that it is today, it's amazing the drafters even considered the amendment's effect on the children of aliens.
But they did.
The very author of the citizenship clause, Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan, expressly said: "This 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."
In the 1884 case Elk v. Wilkins, the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment did not even confer citizenship on Indians -because they were subject to tribal jurisdiction, not U.S. jurisdiction.
For a hundred years, that was how it stood, with only one case adding the caveat that children born to LEGAL permanent residents of the U.S., gainfully employed, and who were not employed by a foreign government would also be deemed citizens under the 14th Amendment. (United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 1898.)
And then, out of the blue in 1982, Justice Brennan slipped a footnote into his 5-4 opinion in Plyler v. Doe, asserting that "no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment 'jurisdiction' can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful." (Other than the part about one being lawful and the other not.)
Brennan's authority for this lunatic statement was that it appeared in a 1912 book written by Clement L.
So on one hand we have the history, the objective, the author's intent and 100 years of history of the 14th Amendment, which says that the 14th Amendment does not confer citizenship on children born to illegal immigrants.
On the other hand, we have a random outburst by some guy named Clement - who, I'm guessing, was too cheap to hire an American housekeeper.
Any half-wit, including Clement L. Bouve, could conjure up a raft of such "plausible distinction(s)" before breakfast. Among them: Legal immigrants have been checked for subversive ties, contagious diseases, and have some qualification to be here other than "lives within walking distance."
But most important, Americans have a right to decide, as the people of other countries do, who becomes a citizen.
Combine Justice Brennan's footnote with America's ludicrously generous welfare policies, and you end up with a bankrupt country.
Consider the story of one family of illegal immigrants described in the Spring 2005 Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons:
"Cristobal Silverio came illegally from Oxtotilan, Mexico, in 1997 and brought his wife Felipa, plus three children aged 19, 12 and 8. Felipa ... gave birth to a new daughter, her anchor baby, named Flor. Flor was premature, spent three months in the neonatal incubator, and cost San Joaquin Hospital more than $300,000. Meanwhile, (Felipa's 19-year-old daughter) Lourdes plus her illegal alien husband produced their own anchor baby, Esmeralda. Grandma Felipa created a second anchor baby, Cristian. ... The two Silverio anchor babies generate $1,000 per month in public welfare funding. Flor gets $600 per month for asthma. Healthy Cristian gets $400. Cristobal and Felipa last year earned $18,000 picking fruit. Flor and Cristian were paid $12,000 for being anchor babies."
In the Silverios' munificent new hometown of Stockton, Calif., 70 percent of the 2,300 babies born in 2003 in the San Joaquin General Hospital were anchor babies. As of this month, Stockton is $23 million in the hole.
It's bad enough to be governed by 5-4 decisions written by liberal judicial activists. In the case of "anchor babies," America is being governed by Brennan's 1982 footnote.
An EO is sufficient to overcome this - because it was never real to begin with. A footnote is not law.
In fact, this alleged right derives only from a footnote slyly slipped into a Supreme Court opinion by Justice Brennan in 1982. You might say it snuck in when no one was looking, and now we have to let it stay.
The 14th Amendment was added after the Civil War in order to overrule the Supreme Court's Dred Scott decision, which had held that black slaves were not citizens of the United States. The precise purpose of the amendment was to stop sleazy Southern states from denying citizenship rights to newly freed slaves -many of whom had roots in this country longer than a lot of white people.
The amendment guaranteed that freed slaves would have all the privileges of citizenship by providing: "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."
The drafters of the 14th amendment had no intention of conferring citizenship on the children of aliens who happened to be born in the U.S. (For my younger readers, back in those days, people cleaned their own houses and raised their own kids.)
Inasmuch as America was not the massive welfare state operating as a magnet for malingerers, frauds and cheats that it is today, it's amazing the drafters even considered the amendment's effect on the children of aliens.
But they did.
The very author of the citizenship clause, Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan, expressly said: "This 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."
In the 1884 case Elk v. Wilkins, the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment did not even confer citizenship on Indians -because they were subject to tribal jurisdiction, not U.S. jurisdiction.
For a hundred years, that was how it stood, with only one case adding the caveat that children born to LEGAL permanent residents of the U.S., gainfully employed, and who were not employed by a foreign government would also be deemed citizens under the 14th Amendment. (United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 1898.)
And then, out of the blue in 1982, Justice Brennan slipped a footnote into his 5-4 opinion in Plyler v. Doe, asserting that "no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment 'jurisdiction' can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful." (Other than the part about one being lawful and the other not.)
Brennan's authority for this lunatic statement was that it appeared in a 1912 book written by Clement L.
So on one hand we have the history, the objective, the author's intent and 100 years of history of the 14th Amendment, which says that the 14th Amendment does not confer citizenship on children born to illegal immigrants.
On the other hand, we have a random outburst by some guy named Clement - who, I'm guessing, was too cheap to hire an American housekeeper.
Any half-wit, including Clement L. Bouve, could conjure up a raft of such "plausible distinction(s)" before breakfast. Among them: Legal immigrants have been checked for subversive ties, contagious diseases, and have some qualification to be here other than "lives within walking distance."
But most important, Americans have a right to decide, as the people of other countries do, who becomes a citizen.
Combine Justice Brennan's footnote with America's ludicrously generous welfare policies, and you end up with a bankrupt country.
Consider the story of one family of illegal immigrants described in the Spring 2005 Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons:
"Cristobal Silverio came illegally from Oxtotilan, Mexico, in 1997 and brought his wife Felipa, plus three children aged 19, 12 and 8. Felipa ... gave birth to a new daughter, her anchor baby, named Flor. Flor was premature, spent three months in the neonatal incubator, and cost San Joaquin Hospital more than $300,000. Meanwhile, (Felipa's 19-year-old daughter) Lourdes plus her illegal alien husband produced their own anchor baby, Esmeralda. Grandma Felipa created a second anchor baby, Cristian. ... The two Silverio anchor babies generate $1,000 per month in public welfare funding. Flor gets $600 per month for asthma. Healthy Cristian gets $400. Cristobal and Felipa last year earned $18,000 picking fruit. Flor and Cristian were paid $12,000 for being anchor babies."
In the Silverios' munificent new hometown of Stockton, Calif., 70 percent of the 2,300 babies born in 2003 in the San Joaquin General Hospital were anchor babies. As of this month, Stockton is $23 million in the hole.
It's bad enough to be governed by 5-4 decisions written by liberal judicial activists. In the case of "anchor babies," America is being governed by Brennan's 1982 footnote.
An EO is sufficient to overcome this - because it was never real to begin with. A footnote is not law.
Posted on 10/31/23 at 8:59 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Trump said he will impose a total naval embargo ON CARTELS!
This would be difficult but watching a movie "cocaine shark" would be cool after the navy found one sub and blew it up
He said he'll order the Department of Defense to inflict maximum damage on CARTEL leadership and operations, designate CARTELS as Foreign Terrorist Organizations, and choke off CARTEL access to the global financial system.
This would be more effective if it doesn't mean War with mexico and another interment camp situation
This post was edited on 10/31/23 at 9:00 am
Posted on 10/31/23 at 8:59 am to YouKnowImRight
quote:
Looks like a good list,
Its not a bad list, its just missing all the details that make it feasible.
They seem more like goals than plans, and we know how his plans seem to stall...
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:00 am to RFK
I like most of it, but the drugs are coming thru the border from Mexico. Navy won't be much help in the desert.
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:01 am to SDVTiger
quote:
This seems like a solid plan. Whats Rons stance on this? Let them contunue as is? Or will he copy this
You already know the answer and are being obtuse
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:02 am to RFK
Where is the, win a rigged election, plan?
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:02 am to lake chuck fan
quote:99% of illegal fentanyl comes from China to Mexico.
but the drugs are coming thru the border from Mexico. Navy won't be much help in the desert.
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:06 am to TBoy
quote:
So executive orders can overrule constitutional provisions now? Good to know,
No but it would set up a SCOTUS hearing on it.
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:07 am to rmnldr
quote:
You already know the answer
Yes I realize he just copies Trump and fly illegals into the country. First Class
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:07 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
99% of illegal fentanyl comes from China to Mexico.
Would continue even with a billion dollar naval campaign
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:09 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
99% of illegal fentanyl comes from China to Mexico.
I guess I having trouble envisioning how this works even with Mexico's help or approval much less with out it. We are going to stop and search every ship, every container entering Mexico's ports?
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:13 am to RFK
I'm good with all of it, I just don't think he has a serious plan to implement it much less the people to execute it. He's only got 1 term which means he has to hit the ground running and be hyper effective right off the bat too which is a pipe dream.
If you actually care about getting things done there is a guy who is great at that but he isn't as good at memes. If Trump wins I'll certainly cheer for him to succeed I just don't see it. Of course I don't see a path for him to win the General anyway without GA and AZ so it's all moot.
If you actually care about getting things done there is a guy who is great at that but he isn't as good at memes. If Trump wins I'll certainly cheer for him to succeed I just don't see it. Of course I don't see a path for him to win the General anyway without GA and AZ so it's all moot.
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:16 am to SuperOcean
quote:Indeed.
This would be more effective if it doesn't mean War with mexico and another interment camp situation
It would optimally include Mexican cooperation.
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:19 am to ThuperThumpin
quote:Assuming zero intel, I guess that would be the case.
We are going to stop and search every ship, every container entering Mexico's ports?
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:22 am to ThuperThumpin
quote:
I guess I having trouble envisioning how this works even with Mexico's help or approval much less with out it.
Would never work.
Its a pipe dream.
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:24 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
An EO wouldn't necessarily challenge any case.
It would trigger a lawsuit. A lawsuit may or may not get a federal judge to issue an injunction stopping the EO until the lawsuit makes it through the judicial system.
It's the only power the executive has.
The legislative can step in and solve the matter much more quickly.
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:26 am to RFK
Depends on support from Congress. His first go around Congress back stabbed him.
I don't care for 10 and 11. Seems like "quick fixes" not cures. And why are we having to give up saving federal lands to house illegals and clean up the messes that progs created. He needs to move homeless and rest to Dem cities and force them to figure it out.
I don't care for 10 and 11. Seems like "quick fixes" not cures. And why are we having to give up saving federal lands to house illegals and clean up the messes that progs created. He needs to move homeless and rest to Dem cities and force them to figure it out.
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:30 am to GumboPot
quote:
It would trigger a lawsuit. A lawsuit may or may not get a federal judge to issue an injunction stopping the EO until the lawsuit makes it through the judicial system.
At least gets something moving. Better than what we are dealing with now.
At minimum I want a law that no illegal nor refugee can EVER become a citizen. "Path to Citizenship" needs to stop for these people. Legalization is one thing but not voting rights. And DLs should have status marked for voting purposes.
Take that out of the equation and Dems will become border hawks.
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:38 am to RFK
I wonder if he still wants to reevaluate our involvement in international orgs like UN and nato. Also he needs to create an investigation into anti-American NGOs and I want to see the Soros family sent to the gulags.
Posted on 10/31/23 at 9:43 am to aggressor
quote:
I'm good with all of it, I just don't think he has a serious plan to implement it much less the people to execute it
Theyre not bad ideas as stand alone, but theyre impossible to enforce so they are literal pipe dreams.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News