Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Immigration

Immigration Immigration Political Forum - For topics and discussions about illegal immigrants and immigrant rights


Thanks Tree5Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 18th, 2016, 06:06 AM   #11
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Deer Park, Washington
Posts: 1,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twisted Sister View Post
We agree to disagree. Cruz popped out on Canadian soil which makes him a natural born Canadian citizen and is eligible to be Prime Minister of Canada but not President of the United States. John McCain popped out in the Canal Zone that was a Territory of the US at the time so he is eligible.
Read the link above. It defines the term "natural born citizen".

"Congress has made equally clear from the time of the framing of the Constitution to the current day that, subject to certain residency requirements on the parents, someone born to a U.S. citizen parent generally becomes a U.S. citizen without regard to whether the birth takes place in Canada, the Canal Zone, or the continental United States."

Last edited by Pete Moss; March 18th, 2016 at 06:08 AM.
Pete Moss is offline  
Old March 18th, 2016, 06:13 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Hollywood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Memphis, Tn.
Posts: 16,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete Moss View Post
From the link.

"The original intent of the 14th Amendment was clearly not to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law and obtaining citizenship for their offspring, nor obtaining benefits at taxpayer expense. Current estimates indicate there may be over 300,000 anchor babies born each year in the U.S., thus causing illegal alien mothers to add more to the U.S. population each year than immigration from all sources in an average year before 1965.

Australia rescinded birthright citizenship in 2007, as did New Zealand in 2006, Ireland in 2005, France in 1993, and the United Kingdom in 1983. This leaves the United States and Canada as the only remaining industrialized nations to grant automatic citizenship to every person born within the borders of the country, irrespective of their parents' nationality or immigration status.

American citizens must be wary of elected politicians voting to illegally extend our generous social benefits to illegal aliens and other criminals."
Oh, so NOW we are supposed to emulate the policies of those foreigners and damned socialist Euro-trash countries.
Hollywood is online now  
Old March 18th, 2016, 06:17 AM   #13
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Deer Park, Washington
Posts: 1,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollywood View Post
Oh, so NOW we are supposed to emulate the policies of those foreigners and damned socialist Euro-trash countries.
So you support a pregnant illegal popping her child out on American soil and thereby obtaining citizenship for that child and benefits for the entire family.
Pete Moss is offline  
Old March 18th, 2016, 06:56 AM   #14
Commie Exposer
 
Jimmyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 38,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twisted Sister View Post
We agree to disagree. Cruz popped out on Canadian soil which makes him a natural born Canadian citizen and is eligible to be Prime Minister of Canada but not President of the United States. John McCain popped out in the Canal Zone that was a Territory of the US at the time so he is eligible.

edit: Amendments can be overturned several ways but the Articles cannot unless the US Constitution is re-written which would result in Civil War 2.
A quick and short definition of what natural born meant to the founders.


Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 of the Constitution gives the Congress the power to establish naturalization:
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States....
The Congress passed An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization on March 26, 1790:
And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens.
Thanks from Pete Moss
Jimmyb is offline  
Old March 18th, 2016, 07:14 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Twisted Sister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Brown Township, Ohio
Posts: 9,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
A quick and short definition of what natural born meant to the founders.


Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 of the Constitution gives the Congress the power to establish naturalization:
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States....
The Congress passed An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization on March 26, 1790:
And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens.
Sorry to say but Judge Judy would call that hearsay and not admissible in a court of law.
Twisted Sister is offline  
Old March 18th, 2016, 07:22 AM   #16
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Deer Park, Washington
Posts: 1,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twisted Sister View Post
Sorry to say but Judge Judy would call that hearsay and not admissible in a court of law.
Now you're peeing on our boots and calling it rain. You may not like it, but it's reality.
Pete Moss is offline  
Old March 18th, 2016, 07:59 AM   #17
Commie Exposer
 
Jimmyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 38,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twisted Sister View Post
Sorry to say but Judge Judy would call that hearsay and not admissible in a court of law.
The Robert’s court has sought guidance regarding original intent. This isn’t the Bill of Rights, but the principle favors this principle much more so as there is no precedent regarding natural born citizen:

Town of Greece v. Galloway 134 S.Ct. 1811 (2014):
134 S.Ct. 1811 (2014) This Court has often noted that actions taken by the First Congress are presumptively consistent with the Bill of Rights, see, e.g., Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957, 980, 111 S.Ct. 2680, 115 L.Ed.2d 836 (1991), Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132, 150-152, 45 S.Ct. 280, 69 L.Ed. 543 (1925), and this principle has special force when it comes to the interpretation of the Establishment Clause. This Court has always purported to base its Establishment Clause decisions on the original meaning of that provision. Thus, in Marsh, when the Court was called upon to decide whether prayer prior to sessions of a state legislature was consistent with the Establishment Clause, we relied heavily on the history of prayer before sessions of Congress and held that a state legislature may follow a similar practice. See 463 U.S., at 786-792, 103 S.Ct. 3330.

Last edited by Jimmyb; March 18th, 2016 at 02:29 PM.
Jimmyb is offline  
Old March 18th, 2016, 02:28 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: massachusetts
Posts: 7,963
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete Moss View Post
From the link.

"The original intent of the 14th Amendment was clearly not to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law and obtaining citizenship for their offspring, nor obtaining benefits at taxpayer expense. Current estimates indicate there may be over 300,000 anchor babies born each year in the U.S., thus causing illegal alien mothers to add more to the U.S. population each year than immigration from all sources in an average year before 1965.

Australia rescinded birthright citizenship in 2007, as did New Zealand in 2006, Ireland in 2005, France in 1993, and the United Kingdom in 1983. This leaves the United States and Canada as the only remaining industrialized nations to grant automatic citizenship to every person born within the borders of the country, irrespective of their parents' nationality or immigration status.

American citizens must be wary of elected politicians voting to illegally extend our generous social benefits to illegal aliens and other criminals."
Those countries could change the law, in the US it would require changing the constitution, and that takes a bit more work.
It's like abortion in that respect, no political party is willing to suffer the backlash of such an attempt.
The GOP will pander to racists and xenophobes, but they won't risk the backlash of actually doing anything about it, just like they will pander to anti-abortion people, but will not take actions that would risk backlash.
goober is online now  
Old March 18th, 2016, 02:29 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 15,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twisted Sister View Post
When the baby pops out on US soil that is a natural born US citizen even if said baby's parents are both illegal immigrants with criminal records in a foreign country. The sins of the father cannot be put on the son or something like that.
Wrong!!
caconservative is offline  
Old March 18th, 2016, 02:30 PM   #20
Commie Exposer
 
Jimmyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 38,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by goober View Post
Those countries could change the law, in the US it would require changing the constitution, and that takes a bit more work.
It's like abortion in that respect, no political party is willing to suffer the backlash of such an attempt.
The GOP will pander to racists and xenophobes, but they won't risk the backlash of actually doing anything about it, just like they will pander to anti-abortion people, but will not take actions that would risk backlash.
It would not require changing the Constitution to adhere to the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Jimmyb is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Immigration

Tags
jurisdiction, subject, thereof



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sikhs Subject to Turban Search pensacola_niceman Other Religions 1 November 20th, 2010 05:44 AM
Because every subject needs a little chuckle ... tristanrobin Gay and Lesbian Rights 4 January 12th, 2009 03:27 PM
Hucks thoughts on the subject. fxashun Gay and Lesbian Rights 24 March 1st, 2008 06:35 AM
Bill Clinton changing subject from 'me' to 'she' CNN Current Events 1 July 2nd, 2007 11:04 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.