Mass Deportation and Immigration Catch-All | CIA using drones to spy on Mexican drug cartels

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 1K
  • Views: 33K
  • Politics 
farce© said:
Because he believes he is getting under your skin by doing so.
Click to expand...
Probably. And there are things he says here that do bug me. This is not one of them. I couldn’t care less what any MAGAs think about birthright citizenship. I just don’t know why someone would waste time arguing 127 year old SCOTUS precedent should be revisited.
 
lawtig02 said:
Probably. And there are things he says here that do bug me. This is not one of them. I couldn’t care less what any MAGAs think about birthright citizenship. I just don’t know why someone would waste time arguing 127 year old SCOTUS precedent should be revisited.
Click to expand...
Because other posters keep trying to ‘splain it to him after he keeps posting the same bullshit. Rinse and repeat.
 
lawtig02 said:
In addition to the fact that the language of the 14th is not even remotely ambiguous, that’s a big reason SCOTUS settled this issue definitively 127 years ago. No idea why people like Zen are still determined to argue it.
Click to expand...
Zen is a troll, which is why he is on Super Ignore. More upstanding board members should try this feature. Their lives will improve significantly, and they will be spared the indignity of chasing a rabbit with a kazoo.
 
lawtig02 said:
Probably. And there are things he says here that do bug me. This is not one of them. I couldn’t care less what any MAGAs think about birthright citizenship. I just don’t know why someone would waste time arguing 127 year old SCOTUS precedent should be revisited.
Click to expand...
Corporations are people, my friends?
 
finesse said:
Does that mean corporations will adopt their employees, give them allowances instead of a salary and avoid that whole nasty visa thing?
Click to expand...
No, maybe, and possibly.

Corporations were never people until our Supremely Corrupt Court said they were. God help us because most assuredly, the government as it's currently constituted and the Oligarchs won't.
 
StrangePackage said:
If immigrants, documented or not, aren't under the jurisdiction of the United States, how come we can charge them with Federal crimes?
Click to expand...
I don't think that the ability to charge somebody with a crime, when they are in your country, is the sole determiner of what is meant by jurisdiction.
 
wmheel1287 said:
I'll ask this again. Do you believe this debate about the "spirit" of the Amendment should happen with the entire Constitution?
Click to expand...
Of course and it's does. It has to. Obviously the founding fathers had no way to anticipate the existence of social media when drafting the First Amendment, right? I would say there's virtually no doubt that the spirit of free speech would undoubtedly include speech in digital format.

So, when the drafters of the 14th Amendment were imagining who would be given citizenship based on being born in the US, does it seem likely that they were talking about the children of people who were truly immigrating to the US or, in the unfortunate case of slaves, were forced here against their will?

Do we think that they were imagining a time when traveling halfway around the world would take a matter of hours and not months and travel would be so easy that people would be coming here at the 11th hour of their pregnancy, just to take advantage of our birthright citizenship policy, under the guise of "vacationing"?
 
Last edited:
ZenMode said:
I don't think that the ability to charge somebody with a crime, when they are in your country, is the sole determiner of what is meant by jurisdiction.
Click to expand...
... That is literally the definition of jurisdiction. The ability to enact and enforce legal decisions.
 
StrangePackage said:
... That is literally the definition of jurisdiction. The ability to enact and enforce legal decisions.
Click to expand...
Right. I'm just saying that I don't think the ability to charge somebody with a crime is the only consideration in legal jurisdiction.
 
ZenMode said:
Right. I'm just saying that I don't think the ability to charge somebody with a crime is the only consideration in legal jurisdiction.
Click to expand...
Then tell us what you "think" is needed?

Because if the text reads "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof[.]" So why is criminal jurisdiction not sufficient? It's also clear that they're subject to civil jurisdiction as well ..
So is there some other kind of jurisdiction that we need to discuss?
 
StrangePackage said:
Then tell us what you "think" is needed?

Because if the text reads "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof[.]" So why is criminal jurisdiction not sufficient? It's also clear that they're subject to civil jurisdiction as well ..
So is there some other kind of jurisdiction that we need to discuss?
Click to expand...
I think the better question is whether or not simply being able to charge somebody with a crime is the basis for giving their kids citizenship. If I were to drive to Florida and get a speeding ticket, should I start being taxed based on Florida's personal income tax policy? Obviously not. That would be silly because it's clear that my ties to Arizona means that they have jurisdiction over any number of things, not just the ability to write me a speeding ticket.

As I mentioned here, it was a much different time back then. People were picking up their entire lives just to get to our shores to be handed citizenship. Of course it makes sense to give their kids citizenship. It also makes perfect sense to give the children of slaves, who were brought here against their will, citizenship in the US.

The people participating in birth tourism are not immigrating to the US, they are taking advantage of a loophole that doesn't seem to align with the original intention of the 14th Amendment.

EDIT: But what do I know? I'm just a troll who doesn't believe what he's saying, anyway. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
“The Trump administration launched an immigration enforcement blitz in Chicago on Sunday that includes several federal agencies which have been granted additional authorities to arrest undocumented immigrants in the US, according to multiple sources.

The blitz is part of a broader effort to add manpower to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which has limited resources and agents, as the administration tries to ramp up arrests nationwide and amass a larger force to carry out the president’s deportation pledge.

… In a statement, ICE confirmed the “enhanced targeted operations” in Chicago began Sunday.

“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, along with federal partners, including the FBI, ATF, DEA, CBP and the U.S. Marshals Service, began conducting enhanced targeted operations today in Chicago to enforce U.S. immigration law and preserve public safety and national security by keeping potentially dangerous criminal aliens out of our communities,” the statement reads.

…
Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove is in Chicago Sunday to observe immigration enforcement operations.

“This morning, I had the privilege of observing brave men and women of the Department deploying in lockstep with DHS to address a national emergency arising from four years of failed immigration policy,” Bove said in a statement.

Previous administrations, including the Biden administration, also sought out public safety and national security threats when carrying out immigration enforcement operations. Homan has argued that guidelines under Biden set up hurdles for officers targeting criminals, while former Biden officials maintained those guidelines established a clear focus. …”
 
“… Homan told ABC News in an interview that aired on Sunday there’s “no number” of deportations needed to view Trump’s immigration agenda as successful, stating that “every public safety threat removed from this country is a success.”

“There’s no number on it. So my success is going to be based on what Congress gives us. More money, the better we’re going to do,” Homan said. …”

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top