Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message

Anchor Baby grows up to become a Proud Guatemalan

Posted on 7/1/26 at 6:56 am
Posted by GatorOnAnIsland
Florida
Member since Jan 2019
10214 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 6:56 am
Posted by Ingeniero
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2013
23319 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 6:59 am to
Oh no, someone said something stupid! Quick, throw away the constitution!

And that's not at all what Wong Kim Ark decided stop getting your legal advice from Twitter
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
479687 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 7:01 am to
quote:

"The first requirement is a person's parents must be in the country legally"


Link? That's not what WKA says
Posted by dstone12
Texan
Member since Jan 2007
40712 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 7:01 am to
quote:

Oh no, someone said something stupid! Quick, throw away the constitution!


I don’t think Gator is saying throw away the constitution.

He’s saying the SCOTUS misinterpreted the constitution.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
479687 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 7:03 am to
quote:

I don’t think Gator is saying throw away the constitution.

He’s saying the SCOTUS misinterpreted the constitution.


He posted a summary of Wong Kim Ark that is incorrect, which was validated yesterday.
Posted by HagaDaga
Member since Oct 2020
8308 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 7:23 am to
And because she* is a "citizen" her children don't even have to be born here to be "citizens". China and so many other nations can just breed "Americans" for generations that never have to step foot on American soil. This is the anti-American clown world our board lefties, and lefty "legal beagles" are celebrating.

*I know she lives here, Chicago iirc
Posted by olehickory1767
Member since Dec 2024
107 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 7:30 am to
Yo, somebody call TBoy and tell him his anchor babies have found another home. He said America is the only home they’ll ever know hahahaha what an oaf.
Posted by TenWheelsForJesus
Member since Jan 2018
11514 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 7:31 am to
quote:

Oh no, someone said something stupid! Quick, throw away the constitution!



Giving foreigners with no allegiance to this country the ability to be our leaders is retarded. You idiots will give away this country while feeling morally superior by standing up for a poor interpretation of "muh Constitution."

I love the Constitution so much that I'm going to let others use it to ruin the best country in the world. I'm so smart.

It was a big win for the enemies of America, so I can see why some of the responders in this thread are celebrating.

WKA was the wrong ruling, too. Using a bad ruling to justify an even worse ruling doesn't make one the legal scholar he thinks he is.
Posted by Ingeniero
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2013
23319 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 7:37 am to
quote:

Giving foreigners with no allegiance to this country the ability to be our leaders is retarded. You idiots will give away this country while feeling morally superior by standing up for a poor interpretation of "muh Constitution."


It's not a poor interpretation if it's based on historical fact. The framers of the 14th intended it to work as it does, which is why it's written that way. Not liking what's written isn't the same as poor interpretation.

quote:

I love the Constitution so much that I'm going to let others use it to ruin the best country in the world. I'm so smart.


Again, you'd have to take that up with the guys who wrote it. We could check to see if they said something about gypsies and Chinese who were untrustworthy but afforded citizenship anyway?

quote:

It was a big win for the enemies of America, so I can see why some of the responders in this thread are celebrating.


Emotional argument. "Does this benefit people I don't like?" isn't a question the supreme court should consider when making decisions.

Posted by TrueTiger
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
82997 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 7:38 am to
quote:

WKA was the wrong ruling, too


WKA’s parents were legal residents, not illegal.

The court could have stuck with that and not expanded citizenship to children of illegals.
Posted by TrueTiger
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
82997 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 7:41 am to

The left loves abortion. How about mandatory abortion for pregnant illegals.


We could call the program, “free reproductive healthcare for immigrants”

Posted by Ingeniero
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2013
23319 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 7:43 am to
quote:

WKA’s parents were legal residents, not illegal.

The court could have stuck with that and not expanded citizenship to children of illegals.


I think the decision would've been even more lopsided if the government argued that. Gorsuch says it in his dissent:

quote:

The government insists that aspect of the order can survive any possible legal challenge, too, because individuals can secure domicile in this country only if they do so in compliance with federal law. See ante, at 57–58, n. 10 (THOMAS, J., dissenting). About that, however, I harbor doubts. Perhaps Wong Kim Ark does not squarely foreclose the government’s posi- tion. After all, that case addressed a child born to parents who lawfully resided in this country. Still, I wonder: Is a child born here to parents who have long chosen to make this Nation their permanent home not a citizen under the Fourteenth Amendment solely because his parents’ pres- ence violates statutory law? If those parents are not domi- ciled here, then where are they domiciled? And if the an- swer is nowhere, how can we reconcile that conclusion with this Court’s longstanding recognition that every person is domiciled somewhere?
Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
66541 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 7:45 am to
quote:

The framers of the 14th intended it to work as it does, which is why it's written that way.


No they did not, which is why they wrote it the way they did.
Posted by TrueTiger
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
82997 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 7:53 am to
The Chinese Exclusion Act at that time forbid citizenship to his parents and under Chinese law the Emperor of China had legal authority over Chinese anywhere they were.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram