- 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
1
Posted on 4/1/26 at 2:23 pm to Tigergreg
quote:
Isn't 2/3 on Congress needed for a Constitutional Amendment? We would never get 2/3 to vote for it. Not a single Dem would be for it.
Nope. We're fricked... So, we're just supposed to ride this sinking ship out in the meantime, until it's sunk and we're fricked... So a few retard libs can feel virtuous and "not racist," and d-bags like Rand Paul, Thomas Massie etc. can pat themselves on the back as being "principled," while they go home to their gated community mansions. So principled.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 2:24 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Smart and/or wise people?
Not you. You're a fricking moron.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 2:25 pm to VOR
quote:
You Christian white baws have a very safe majority...
Changing demographics say otherwise, dipshit.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 2:25 pm to Nosevens
quote:
will never take place on unless upheaval in country has occurred
Sadly that's what it appears it is 100% going to take. By then it will probably be too late anyway. We're about there now.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 2:26 pm to BrodyDad
quote:
The time for passivity has passed. If the United States is to survive, the Caterpillar that is the 1789 Constitution has to cocoon and remerge as something new.
Yup.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 2:27 pm to BTROleMisser
quote:
Not you. You're a fricking moron.
Says the guy who can't read AND just posted this
quote:
Nope. We're fricked... So, we're just supposed to ride this sinking ship out in the meantime, until it's sunk and we're fricked... So a few retard libs can feel virtuous and "not racist," and d-bags like Rand Paul, Thomas Massie etc. can pat themselves on the back as being "principled," while they go home to their gated community mansions. So principled.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 2:29 pm to Powerman
quote:
The issue can be mitigated by securing the border in the meantime and continuing deportations.
The problem is so much bigger than illegals having babies in the US. In 2019, it was estimated that 72,000 births in the US were to tourists, foreign students and other visitors - this does not include births to illegals.
I've got to believe this number has done nothing but grow since 2019.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 2:31 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Nope. We're fricked... So, we're just supposed to ride this sinking ship out in the meantime, until it's sunk and we're fricked... So a few retard libs can feel virtuous and "not racist," and d-bags like Rand Paul, Thomas Massie etc. can pat themselves on the back as being "principled," while they go home to their gated community mansions. So principled.
How am I wrong? Look at the Europe... UK, France, Netherlands, Germany, Ireland etc etc etc. That's where we'll be in a few years with unfettered immigration and importing millions of hostile, anti-American, Anti-Christian third world shitbirds into this country. But hey, at least we'll be following "Constitutional principles," right? Awesome. Let's see where that gets us... other than the complete destruction of this country.
Prick.
This post was edited on 4/1/26 at 2:33 pm
Posted on 4/1/26 at 2:33 pm to Powerman
quote:
The issue can be mitigated by securing the border in the meantime and continuing deportations.
Honestly, you are not wrong. Completely secure the border and only admit people lawfully. 100% lawful entry and most people would be happy with pure birthright citizenship.
Now, if you could figure out a way to stop healthcare tourism before babies are born here to those who have entered legally (tourist or business visa), that'd be even better.
This post was edited on 4/1/26 at 2:35 pm
Posted on 4/1/26 at 2:37 pm to BTROleMisser
Ironically NONE of those countries have pure birthright citizenship.
They are committing cultural suicide.
They are committing cultural suicide.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 2:58 pm to Oates Mustache
The problem is it doesn't matter. People come to Congress saying they're going to do this and that, they don't and get rich doing nothing. We elect someone else who says they're going to do something, they don't. The whole, you can just replace them idea simply isn't working. What is the recourse, because it's not voting in new people.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 3:02 pm to ReauxlTide222
If you are talking legislation then 90% sure. But you were talking amending the Constitution which requires 2/3 of the states so if 15 of them don't vote for it, then the question fails. That's how the amendment process works
Posted on 4/1/26 at 3:05 pm to Oates Mustache
Granting U.S. Citizenship to the children born during the mother's illegal presence in the U.S.- unauthorized for the purpose of permanent residence-is akin to allowing a bank robber to pass title of the stolen cash and goods to their children and then forcing the bank to open an account for the children and provide services.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 3:10 pm to Oates Mustache
This is a stupid take. The 14th amendment doesn’t support “birthright citizenship” for children of illegal aliens. We don’t need a new law. We just need the current law correctly applied.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 3:21 pm to Riverside
I tend to agree. I just think previous SCOTUS justices -never faced with anything resembling the current illegal immigration crisis- have interpreted it that way for so long, its just accepted by default.
There will be a lot of carping from the left about "under the jurisdiction thereof" being a set aside only for excluding invading forces and diplomats, but even those individuals are not entirely immune from the US legal system at some level. No human is ever on this soil and NOT under the jurisdiction thereof- not even ones physically in a foreign consulate or embassy. It makes the statement rather pointless, unless it has a deeper meaning. Can we not interpret, with complete accuracy, this statement to also exclude individuals who do NOT enter the country under the legal authority(jurisdiction) of the United States?
There will be a lot of carping from the left about "under the jurisdiction thereof" being a set aside only for excluding invading forces and diplomats, but even those individuals are not entirely immune from the US legal system at some level. No human is ever on this soil and NOT under the jurisdiction thereof- not even ones physically in a foreign consulate or embassy. It makes the statement rather pointless, unless it has a deeper meaning. Can we not interpret, with complete accuracy, this statement to also exclude individuals who do NOT enter the country under the legal authority(jurisdiction) of the United States?
This post was edited on 4/1/26 at 3:23 pm
Posted on 4/1/26 at 3:26 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:
, but even those individuals are not entirely immune from the US legal system at some level.
It is the definition and usage of the term "subject to the jurisdiction" at the time the amendment was written.
quote:
-never faced with anything resembling the current illegal immigration crisis
Should have no bearing on their ruling.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 3:36 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The non-authoritarians are never the "wrong" team
In this room, you know that's not correct.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 3:39 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
It is the definition and usage of the term "subject to the jurisdiction" at the time the amendment was written.
That cannot be said definitively. We know this because it initially was interpreted to exclude Native Americans.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 4:19 pm to Oates Mustache
While I agree in principle, it will never happen because Democrats want birthright citizenship and as much illegal immigration as they can get away with because blue states are allowing illegal immigrants to vote simply by giving them driver's licenses which automatically registers them to vote.
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News