For those who still think the border facilities are fine

Dec 2018
4,006
1,152
New England
The way the Constitution is written, anyone can come into the country. It is only regulated by various laws and treaties but not by the Constitution.
Have to disagree there. There is nothing the federal government can do (legally) without authorization that ultimately comes from the Constitution. Anything not enumerated there is a state issue.
 
Jul 2018
2,398
604
Earth
Have to disagree there. There is nothing the federal government can do (legally) without authorization that ultimately comes from the Constitution. Anything not enumerated there is a state issue.
The States give up their power every day. Read the 10th Amendment.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. "

If the States don't claim their powers then the federal government can take over. The States do grant immigrants, even illegal aliens, rights in their State Constitutions that are not mentioned in the federal Constitution.

California State Constitution
Article I
Section 20
Text of Section 20:
Noncitizens have the same property rights as citizens
Article I, California Constitution - Ballotpedia

Colorado State Constitution
Article II
Text of Section 27:
Property Rights of Aliens

Aliens, who are or may hereafter become bona fide residents of this state, may acquire, inherit, possess, enjoy and dispose of property, real and personal, as native born citizens.[1]
Article II, Colorado Constitution - Ballotpedia
 
Dec 2018
4,006
1,152
New England
The States give up their power every day. Read the 10th Amendment.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. "

If the States don't claim their powers then the federal government can take over. The States do grant immigrants, even illegal aliens, rights in their State Constitutions that are not mentioned in the federal Constitution.

California State Constitution
Article I
Section 20
Text of Section 20:
Noncitizens have the same property rights as citizens
Article I, California Constitution - Ballotpedia

Colorado State Constitution
Article II
Text of Section 27:
Property Rights of Aliens

Aliens, who are or may hereafter become bona fide residents of this state, may acquire, inherit, possess, enjoy and dispose of property, real and personal, as native born citizens.[1]
Article II, Colorado Constitution - Ballotpedia
Sorry, no, that's not what the tenth means. It means any powers not enumerate in the Constitution cannot be taken up by the Federal government under any circumstances. Such powers are reserved for the states or the people (which, logically, means the states as the Feds have no say in un-enumerated powers, and that includes arbitrating between the people and the states).

The 9th and 10th were written to resolve the ambiguity created by the Constitution enumerating some powers for the federal government. Those who enacted the Bill of Rights understood those amendments as limiting central authority, not as a means for the Federal Government to grab more power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: caconservative
Jul 2018
2,398
604
Earth
Sorry, no, that's not what the tenth means. It means any powers not enumerate in the Constitution cannot be taken up by the Federal government under any circumstances. Such powers are reserved for the states or the people (which, logically, means the states as the Feds have no say in un-enumerated powers, and that includes arbitrating between the people and the states).

The 9th and 10th were written to resolve the ambiguity created by the Constitution enumerating some powers for the federal government. Those who enacted the Bill of Rights understood those amendments as limiting central authority, not as a means for the Federal Government to grab more power.
The federal government can take control of those powers through Congress because this is a republic and the federal supremacy clause. If Congress passes laws that infringes on States' rights then the States should sue. If they don't they give up their rights per the 10th Amendment.
 
Nov 2012
9,145
3,649
Chicago
Surely, Bush and Cheney will always be assholes, no better than Trump.
I hate to admit it but you're right about Bush and Cheney, however I must disagree about your characterization of President Trump, he has proven compassionate, strong, and temporate in his decisions, and is respected both at home and overseas. America has regained it's prestige which it lost during the last two administrations-especially the Obama Adm.:neutral:
 
Jul 2008
18,971
12,813
Virginia Beach, VA
I hate to admit it but you're right about Bush and Cheney, however I must disagree about your characterization of President Trump, he has proven compassionate, strong, and temporate in his decisions, and is respected both at home and overseas. America has regained it's prestige which it lost during the last two administrations-especially the Obama Adm.:neutral:
What are you smoking and are you going to share with the rest of the class?

Respected at home? From the day he was elected the number of people who have a unfavorable view of him outnumber those with a favorable view. 3 million more people voted for a completely unlikeable Hillary than voted for Trump.

Respected overseas? Merkel has shown she has no respect for him. The British Ambassador to the US has no respect for him. Please tell me where you see one bit of “respect” for Obama overseas?
 

RNG

Forum Staff
Apr 2013
38,937
26,851
La La Land North
What are you smoking and are you going to share with the rest of the class?

Respected at home? From the day he was elected the number of people who have a unfavorable view of him outnumber those with a favorable view. 3 million more people voted for a completely unlikeable Hillary than voted for Trump.

Respected overseas? Merkel has shown she has no respect for him. The British Ambassador to the US has no respect for him. Please tell me where you see one bit of “respect” for Obama overseas?
Various dictators with blood on their hands seem to like him, when they aren't calling him Dotard.
 
Jul 2014
15,306
9,408
massachusetts
The way the Constitution is written, anyone can come into the country. It is only regulated by various laws and treaties but not by the Constitution.

There is an interesting tidbit from history. When the eleven States seceded from the Union their inhabitants were no longer American citizens. Consequently, all of the kids born in those States during that time until the particular State was readmitted to the Union were foreigners. The 14th Amendment did not make them "natural born" citizens. The 32nd Vice President was born in Texas when it was a part of a foreign country so, Constitutionally, he should have been barred from being elected Vice President. He gained his citizenship when Texas was readmitted to the Union but he was not a "natural born citizen". That is a strict interpretation of the Constitution.
The confederacy wasn't a foreign country, it was always part of the United States, just a region that was in rebellion.
That's why a person born in Texas during the civil war was considered a natural born citizen.
 
Dec 2018
2,088
1,235
Unionville Indiana
I must disagree about your characterization of President Trump, he has proven compassionate, strong, and temporate in his decisions, and is respected both at home and overseas. America has regained it's prestige which it lost during the last two administrations-especially the Obama Adm.:neutral:
No offense intended, but in terms of temperament, competence, intellect and integrity, Trump isn't qualified to serve as a town clerk. Our closest NATO allies think he's a mentally ill blowhard.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: leekohler2
Dec 2018
2,088
1,235
Unionville Indiana
Have to disagree there. There is nothing the federal government can do (legally) without authorization that ultimately comes from the Constitution. Anything not enumerated there is a state issue.
I hate to get too picky, but SCOTUS has disagreed with your assertion since McCulloch v. Maryland (1819).

(Holding: Although the Constitution does not specifically give Congress the power to establish a bank, it delegates the ability to tax and spend. Since a bank is a proper and suitable instrument to assist the operations of the government in the collection and disbursement of the revenue, and federal laws have supremacy over state laws, Maryland had no power to interfere with the bank's operation by taxing it. Maryland Court of Appeals reversed.)