Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "Why is there so much opposition to ending birthright citizenship?"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Wow, the United States finally joins the rest of the world in 2025 where citizenship requires at least one parent be a citizen. Way to go with common sense USA. Birthright citizenship as it was previously done was nutso. [/quote] Sorry, but this EO is unconstitutional. If you don't like the Fourteenth Amendment, then propose an amendment to change it.[/quote] Scotus will uphold it [/quote] Will be interesting watching the “originalists” twist themselves into pretzels to explain how citizenship depends on whether your parents were “lawful permanent residents,” which is a concept that didn’t even exist in 1868, or citizens. Also I can’t wait to hear their explanation for why thus is the correct interpretation of the 14th amendment even though the slaves wouldn’t be citizens if it’s right. Come to think of it, Thomas likely isn’t a citizen if this is the right interpretation since his ancestry certainly traces back to two slaves (ie non-citizens) who had a child.[/quote] I don’t have a crystal ball, so obviously I don’t actually know how this will shake out. I just don’t think it’ll be as torturous of an interpretation process as you seem to think. If the amendment drafters wanted BRC to apply to anyone born on US soil, they could’ve stopped at “born in the US.” Instead they continued with “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Words have meaning. (And no, jurisdiction is not synonymous with laws.) [/quote] Words have meaning, and you have trouble with both.[/quote] Oh what a compelling argument! You sure showed me![/quote] Are there any laws or obligations that foreign citizens have to obey from their country of origin if they reside in the USA such as military service or taxes on US income? The answer is yes. Only one other country taxes residents abroad, and several countries require military service or registering a deferment at a consulate for overseas citizens. Clearly those people are subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign government. Like I posted earlier when an act of Congress defined terms and gave native Americans citizenship, you can have the government be it via EO or Congress redefine the term.[/quote] You're saying that people here with a work visa are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States? Scratches head. Hmm.[/quote] No I'm pointing out that they're not soley under the jurisdiction of the USA which is why the native americans were not citizens until 1924.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics