- 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: Reagan era judges shoots down Trump 14th amendment EO
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:26 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:26 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:What do you think about what Jacob Howard said when he introduced the 14th amendment to congress?
So that’s your hope?
No
It's my legal analysis
2
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:28 pm to Willie Stroker
Or he could've eaten food contaminated with polio.
I personally think he was a sexual deviant like his wife, and he was introduced to polio by a phenomenon I call "shite-dick". I think it's fairly self-explanatory.
I personally think he was a sexual deviant like his wife, and he was introduced to polio by a phenomenon I call "shite-dick". I think it's fairly self-explanatory.
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:28 pm to RaoulDuke504
Its crazy how differently people read the law.
Just look at a regular family. A random person cant just walk up into the Jones's house, start eating their food, sleeping in the bed, and call yourself a Jones. You have to be born into that household, or adopted. but the choice is still their's.
The Constitution starts off as "We the People" (IMO meaning citizens). Does that have to be stated every sentence to know who they are referencing to each amendment? Lets try it:
14th Amendment
All persons born (to we the people) or naturalized (by we the people) in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.....
Solved.
Just look at a regular family. A random person cant just walk up into the Jones's house, start eating their food, sleeping in the bed, and call yourself a Jones. You have to be born into that household, or adopted. but the choice is still their's.
The Constitution starts off as "We the People" (IMO meaning citizens). Does that have to be stated every sentence to know who they are referencing to each amendment? Lets try it:
14th Amendment
All persons born (to we the people) or naturalized (by we the people) in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.....
Solved.
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:29 pm to CarRamrod
I mean the judge is correct though. It’s a clear violation of the 14th amendment. Shouldn’t the path to accomplishment be amending the 14th amendment?
Who cares if it goes to the Supreme Court, it’s still clearly going to violate the 14th amendment. I know that nobody here wants the Supreme Court to start ignoring the constitution
Who cares if it goes to the Supreme Court, it’s still clearly going to violate the 14th amendment. I know that nobody here wants the Supreme Court to start ignoring the constitution
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:31 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
I mean the judge is correct though. It’s a clear violation of the 14th amendment.
quote:
During the debate over the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Howard argued for including the phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof:"
...[E]very person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. 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 accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person.[9]
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:33 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
It’s a clear violation of the 14th amendment.
As interpreted by Judge Gray. Not as interpreted by the people who, you know, wrote the 14th Amendment.
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:34 pm to CarRamrod
Isn’t everyone who is here subject to our jurisdiction other than ambassadors and people like that? Illegal immigrants are still subject to our jurisdiction which is one of the reason they can be deported.
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:35 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
Isn’t everyone who is here subject to our jurisdiction other than ambassadors and people like that?
That’s not how the writers of the amendment interpreted the phrase (that they wrote).
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:38 pm to Tiger1242
i think this is where the whole areguement is mis interpreted on both sides.... you take "subject to our jurisdiction" now and how we think of it... you think of, you here so you are under our jurisdiction and have to obey.
Reading the arguments during the debate of the 14th amendments they straight up said "subject to our jurisdiction" does not mean that.
Reading the arguments during the debate of the 14th amendments they straight up said "subject to our jurisdiction" does not mean that.
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:42 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
Shouldn’t the path to accomplishment be amending the 14th amendment?
They didn't amendment the 14th to include Indians as citizens. They just passed legislation called the Indians Citizenship Act and the POTUS signed it into law. The same could be done with birthright citizenship.
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:43 pm to CarRamrod
quote:
Reading the arguments during the debate of the 14th amendments they straight up said "subject to our jurisdiction" does not mean that.
What did they say it meant?
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:46 pm to CarRamrod
quote:You should read the debates rather than one excerpt from the debates. It's clear that the Senators debated two issues almost exclusively: (1) how should the Citizenship Clause deal with Indians, and (2) was it wise to give birthright citizenship to the children of people temporarily in the United States such as Chinese immigrants, Mongol immigrants, or Gypsies.
During the debate over the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Howard argued for including the phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof:"
...[E]very person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. 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 accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person.[9]
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:48 pm to Willie Stroker
quote:
What did they say it meant?
Thomas Jefferson said “Aliens are the subjects of a foreign power.”
Sen. Trumbull stated during the drafting of the above national birthright law debates that it was the goal to “make citizens of everybody born in the United States who owe allegiance to the United States,” and if “the negro or white man belonged to a foreign Government he would not be a citizen.”
Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee (39th Congress), James F. Wilson of Iowa, confirmed on March 1, 1866 that children under this class of aliens would not be citizens: “We must depend on the general law relating to subjects and citizens recognized by all nations for a definition, and that must lead us to the conclusion that every person born in the United States is a natural-born citizen of such States, except that of children born on our soil to temporary sojourners or representatives of foreign Governments.”
Framer of the Fourteenth Amendments first section, John Bingham, said Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes meant “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.”
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:50 pm to RaoulDuke504
Trump needs to find away to keep pregnant foreigners out of the USA until they drop that kid off shore.
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:51 pm to Doctor Strangelove
quote:
Trump needs to find away to keep pregnant foreigners out of the USA until they drop that kid off shore.
Water canons like Poland.
Posted on 1/23/25 at 3:58 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Living document analysis
Imagine how the Left will use this once it's the Constitutional analytic framework
This board isn't exactly known for ideological consistency, on either side for that matter.
Should the constitution be interpreted exactly as the text was written, or should it be interpreted for the modern age? Well! That depends on the case or topic at hand!
Posted on 1/23/25 at 4:16 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Just because you think it's a big question does not make it so.
it’s a big question that was answered 127 years ago.
The SCOTUS made it very clear what’s “subject to the jurisdiction of” in the 14th amendment means. the exclusion is native american with tribal citizenship and the children of diplomats and foreign ministers.
This question is answered and it was particularly close. 6-2 with 1 judge recusing themselves.
this is the equivalent of a liberal president issuing an executive order saying the 2nd amendment really only applies to organized militia.
Posted on 1/23/25 at 4:20 pm to RaoulDuke504
I read the 14th amendment today. What am I missing?
Posted on 1/23/25 at 4:21 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
the "Economic Stabilization Act of 1970"
A socialist bill passed by passed by a Democrat-controlled House and Democrat-controlled Senate? Color me shocked.
Wouldn't a conservative Republican president have just vetoed that shite?
quote:
Is it tyrannical...
For the president to tell people how much they can charge for goods and services through executive order?
He didn't have to issue that EO, you know. He also didn't have to sign that bill.
Besides, what was all the hubb bubb? I thought the inflation of the 70s was all Carter's fault.
Posted on 1/23/25 at 4:23 pm to RaoulDuke504
It’s all part of the process.
Page 7 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News