Trump targets U.S. birthright citizenship as elections loom

[Srinivas]

 

[bristolboy]

2 minutes ago, Srinivas said:

 

And then Harry Reid went on to propose that the Congress pass a law in defiance of the US Constitution?

[Srinivas]

3 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

And then Harry Reid went on to propose that the Congress pass a law in defiance of the US Constitution?

im sure it made political sense at the moment. same for BC on border

 

[Nyezhov]

There are constitutional scholars that believe that the 14th Amendment does not grant Birthright citizenship, especially in light of existing US Law.

 

The issue is one of allegiance and the use of the word jurisdiction, which does not entail merely personal presence. Its is a legitimate issue and warrants rational discussion.

[pgrahmm]

https://www.euronews.com/2018/01/10/feds-raid-l-maternity-hotel-birth-tourists-n315996

 

NBC news.....This month....

 

Then there's this - "maternity 

hotels".....Expressly to "seed" citizenship......

 

On top of the illegals & certain religious movements using the same "seeding" method.....

 

It's a human gold rush.....

 

This should continue unchecked?.......

 

 

Edited November 1, 2018 by pgrahmm

[bristolboy]

7 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

There are constitutional scholars that believe that the 14th Amendment does not grant Birthright citizenship, especially in light of existing US Law.

 

The issue is one of allegiance and the use of the word jurisdiction, which does not entail merely personal presence. Its is a legitimate issue and warrants rational discussion.

Overwhelmingly constitutional scholars do not agree with that contention. In fact, who are these constitutional scholars?. I'm having a hard time finding them. There is ample history about the creation of the jurisdiction clause and it's quite clear. It was meant to apply to diplomats and also to Native Americans because of treaties signed with their nations.

Even these people were judged to be eligible by the framers of the amendment:

"Mysterious foreign “Gypsies,” who supposedly spoke an unknown language and worshipped strange gods and observed no American laws? Yes, the sponsors explained, it covered them too."

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/birthright-citizenship-constitution/574381/

[heybruce]

52 minutes ago, Srinivas said:

Democrat senator from Neveda : Harry Reid

"If making it easy to be an illegal alien isn't enough, how about offering a reward for being an illegal alien? No sane country would do that, right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission to give birth to a child, we reward that child with US citizenship and guarantee a full access to all public and social services this society provides - and that's a lot of services. Is it any wonder that 2/3 of the babies born at taxpayer expense at county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?"

on video in front of the senate

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1057683481793302528?s=20

 

 

Did Harry Reid go on to say that the President can overrule the 14th amendment by executive order?

[Srinivas]

7 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Did Harry Reid go on to say that the President can overrule the 14th amendment by executive order?

no  but he did recant as his wife had a stern talk with him

"After I proposed that awful bill, my wife immediately sat me down and said ‘Harry, what are you doing? Don’t you know that my father was an immigrant," Reid said in a statement. 

 

Ofcourse she only found out about his major immigration speech on the senate floor when she stumbled on to cspan????

[mtls2005]

No clue why something Harry Reid said in 1993 is supportive of the argument?

 

HARRY REID SAYS 1993 PROPOSAL TO END BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP WAS A MISTAKE AFTER DONALD TRUMP TWEETS

 

Former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid waded into the debate over birthright citizenship on Wednesday after several tweets directed at him by President Donald Trump. Reid issued a statement regarding his 1993 proposal to end birthright citizenship, saying it was a mistake.

 

Then a Nevada Senator, Reid said “no sane country” would grant birthright citizenship. Trump referenced the plan in two tweets on Wednesday, prompting Reid to issue a statement calling it a mistake.

 

“In 1993, around the time Donald Trump was gobbling up tax-free inheritance money from his wealthy father and driving several companies into bankruptcy, I made a mistake,” he said in a statement on Wednesday. “After I proposed that awful bill, my wife Landra immediately sat me down and said, ‘Harry, what are you doing, don’t you know that my father is an immigrant?’ She set me straight.”

 

https://www.newsweek.com/harry-reid-says-1993-proposal-end-birthright-citizenship-was-mistake-after-1195596

 

 

Admitting one has made a mistake seems like a positive character trait? Too bad Trump...oh, nevermind.

 

 

I'm amazed Breitbart articles are allowed to be posted here.

 

 

[Srinivas]

26 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

No clue why something Harry Reid said in 1993 is supportive of the argument?

 

HARRY REID SAYS 1993 PROPOSAL TO END BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP WAS A MISTAKE AFTER DONALD TRUMP TWEETS

 

Former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid waded into the debate over birthright citizenship on Wednesday after several tweets directed at him by President Donald Trump. Reid issued a statement regarding his 1993 proposal to end birthright citizenship, saying it was a mistake.

 

Then a Nevada Senator, Reid said “no sane country” would grant birthright citizenship. Trump referenced the plan in two tweets on Wednesday, prompting Reid to issue a statement calling it a mistake.

 

“In 1993, around the time Donald Trump was gobbling up tax-free inheritance money from his wealthy father and driving several companies into bankruptcy, I made a mistake,” he said in a statement on Wednesday. “After I proposed that awful bill, my wife Landra immediately sat me down and said, ‘Harry, what are you doing, don’t you know that my father is an immigrant?’ She set me straight.”

 

https://www.newsweek.com/harry-reid-says-1993-proposal-end-birthright-citizenship-was-mistake-after-1195596

 

 

Admitting one has made a mistake seems like a positive character trait? Too bad Trump...oh, nevermind.

 

 

I'm amazed Breitbart articles are allowed to be posted here.

 

 

he is lying about his wife lol amazing youd fall for that.

 

Do you really think his wife was unaware of his famous immigration speech on the senate floor and only "sat him down" after hearing about it? ????

is he going to blame his black eye on her now?

he is digging a hole with that response.

 

 

 

[bristolboy]

41 minutes ago, Srinivas said:

he is lying about his wife lol amazing youd fall for that.

 

Do you really think his wife was unaware of his famous immigration speech on the senate floor and only "sat him down" after hearing about it? ????

is he going to blame his black eye on her now?

he is digging a hole with that response.

 

 

 

And amazing that you think this is significant.

[Scott]

Post from an unapproved source, Breitbart, has been removed along with replies.  

 

[stud858]

USA gave so much,  now its hard to go back the other way,  but Trump making the obvious hard decisions.

 

And thanks to B. Streisand for the tribute album.  

 

[Srinivas]

a little historical fact re: 14th amendment

President Andrew Johnson opposed giving freed slaves citizenship, he vetoed the amendment but veto was overturned by congress

 

He was a democrat.

from wikipedia

lthough strongly urged by moderates in Congress to sign the bill, President Andrew Johnsonvetoed it on March 27, 1866. In his veto message, he objected to the measure because it conferred citizenship on the freedmen at a time when 11 out of 36 states were unrepresented in the Congress, and that it discriminated in favor of African-Americans and against whites.^[7][8] Three weeks later, Johnson's veto was overridden and the measure became law.^[9] Despite this victory, even some Republicans who had supported the goals of the Civil Rights Act began to doubt that Congress really possessed constitutional power to turn those goals into laws.^[10][11] The experience also encouraged both radical and moderate Republicans to seek Constitutional guarantees for black rights, rather than relying on temporary political majorities.^[12]

[heybruce]

23 minutes ago, Srinivas said:

a little historical fact re: 14th amendment

President Andrew Johnson opposed giving freed slaves citizenship, he vetoed the amendment but veto was overturned by congress

 

He was a democrat.

from wikipedia

lthough strongly urged by moderates in Congress to sign the bill, President Andrew Johnsonvetoed it on March 27, 1866. In his veto message, he objected to the measure because it conferred citizenship on the freedmen at a time when 11 out of 36 states were unrepresented in the Congress, and that it discriminated in favor of African-Americans and against whites.^[7][8] Three weeks later, Johnson's veto was overridden and the measure became law.^[9] Despite this victory, even some Republicans who had supported the goals of the Civil Rights Act began to doubt that Congress really possessed constitutional power to turn those goals into laws.^[10][11] The experience also encouraged both radical and moderate Republicans to seek Constitutional guarantees for black rights, rather than relying on temporary political majorities.^[12]

Irrelevant.  The Supreme Court ruled that the 14th amendment meant exactly what it said in 1898.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

 

The Democratic Party has changed a lot since the 19th century.  The Republican Party has changed a lot in the last two years.

[Nyezhov]

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

The Supreme Court ruled that the 14th amendment meant exactly what it said in 1898.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

The decision cited does not settle the question of "birthright" citizenship.

[Athens]

On 10/31/2018 at 1:29 AM, Credo said:

And you do realize that as a US citizen, they are subject to US taxes, including on overseas income, just like all other citizens.   

 

Not if there is an agreement on duble tax, then you pay tax where you earned it

[jcsmith]

4 minutes ago, Athens said:

Not if there is an agreement on duble tax, then you pay tax where you earned it

Which countries would those be? To my knowledge all U.S. Citizens have to file a tax return for all foreign earned income. You receive credits and a foreign tax exclusion which will reduce what you have to pay. And I think the rules and such of that varies from country to country. But I was under the impression that all Americans have to file and generally pay some taxes on foreign earned income. 

[Srinivas]

20 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Irrelevant.  The Supreme Court ruled that the 14th amendment meant exactly what it said in 1898.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

 

The Democratic Party has changed a lot since the 19th century.  The Republican Party has changed a lot in the last two years.

its political history.

nice explanation here from Malcolm X

 

 

[bristolboy]

13 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

The decision cited does not settle the question of "birthright" citizenship.

Actually, it does unless the Supreme Court overturns it. And very strongly, too. At the time, Chinese immigrants weren't allowed to be naturalized. They couldn't be citizens of the USA.  Despite that, this child of Chinese immigrants was held to be a citizen by virtue of being born in the USA.

As anyone who is familiar with the arguments of the creators of the 14th amendment knows, the question of "subject to the jurisdiction thereof"  was specifically addressed by them. They unequivocally stated that being born in the USA gave you citizenship. The 3 examples of exemption they cited were children of diplomats, native americans due to the fact that the US had signed treaties with various Native American nations, and children born to invading foreign armies. And no, not figure-of-speech invaders, but soldiers.

From left to right, Constitutional scholars overwhelmingly believe birthright citizenship is settled law.