Into the Night
Verified User
You can't blame your problem on anybody else, Poorboy.
Activist Federal judge blocks Trump's birthright citizenship ban for all infants, testing lower court powers
- Thread starter Truth Detector
- Start date
Into the Night
Verified User
Lots of words that say absolutely nothing. *yawn*'
I find it interesting that you think the USSC ruling that overturned the lower court's national injunction stopping Trump's EO preventing birthright citizenship was just a lot of words that say absolutely nothing.
Into the Night
Verified User
That it does. If an illegal alien is from Venezuela, they are subject to the jurisdiction of Venezuela. That IS their jurisdiction, and that''s where he will be deported to. No hearing necessary.
The jurisdiction of the slaves is the United States. That remained when they were freed.
Not it isn't.
Discarding the Constitution will get you nowhere, Poorboy.
Why do you support rioting, arson, vandalism, organized crime, insurrection, and illegal aliens?
Nope. Go learn what this phrase means.
AI agrees but since Reservation have always been owned by the US and the Federal government can enforce law on it what difference does it really make anyway.
How is it relevant?
They aren't exempt from the jurisdiction of the Federal government. That is the salient point.
Poor Richard Sanders said:
And the 18th amendment - (For anyone that hasn't yet realized how big of an idiot @Into the Night is.)
After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.
The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
Into the Night
Verified User
Because that person is subject to the jurisdiction of Texas, not California.
Just as a illegal alien is subject to the jurisdiction of their originating nation, not the United States.
It says no such thing.
They are subject to US law while here, but their jurisdiction is their originating nation. Illegal aliens are immediately subject to deportation.
Nope. They are subject to Texas law while they are there. Their jurisdiction is still that of California.
It says no such thing.
It says no such thing.
He is. He is subject to the jurisdiction of their originating nation. He is also subject to U.S. law, and the laws of the State and city, while visiting here.
Go learn what a subject of jurisdiction is.
It does not refer to foreigners nor apply to them. Article III creates the Supreme Court and declares what authority and powers it has. The Supreme Court has NO authority to change or judge the Constitution.
AI isn't accepted in court.
Perhaps you should reread the 14th amendment.
Then answer the question of whether citizens of a state are exempt from state laws.
We aren't in court.
So how is state law important. Your reading comprehension is very bad
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Libhater
Verified User
That's the only thing dummycrats want is power. biden let in some 20 million plus illgals in the hope that someday they will all vote democrat.
The courts are who decide the issue of birthright citizenship. They require actual evidence and court cases in support of a position.
The lawyers will do the leg work of looking up case law. AI is plenty for the internet. You can provide a case of an Indian born off the reservation that didn't pay taxes that was granted citizenship prior to 1924 without naturalization if you want. I even take AI under consideration
My reading comprehension seems to be fine. Did you read the full sentence?
The 14th amendment makes a person a citizen of the US and a citizen of the state they are born in. Can a person who is a citizen of a state be exempt from state laws? Or does the second part of the 14th amendment come into play where Indians not taxes are not counted in the census which makes them a separate class of persons?
The next thing you need to answer is what is the jurisdiction of the state in that second sentence? What is the definition of jurisdiction in that sentence? If we accept that jurisdiction only applies to citizens of the state then a state would be free to deny equal protection to citizens of another state.
So the 14th also grants them citizenship to the state they live in. Which brings us back to why didn't that apply to native American born within the territorial limits of the US? (Prior to 1924.)
You are misrepresenting the argument. Indians that live off the reservation in property they own do pay taxes. Look up the Dawes Act of 1877 which granted land to Indians and made them citizens.
Dawes Act (1887)
EnlargeDownload Link Citation: An Act to Provide for the Allotment of Lands in Severalty to Indians on the Various Reservations (General Allotment Act or Dawes Act), Statutes at Large 24, 388-91, NADP Document A1887. View All Pages in the National Archives Catalog View Transcript Approved on...
www.archives.gov
And every Indian born within the territorial limits of the United States to whom allotments shall have been made under the provisions of this act, or under any law or treaty, and every Indian born within the territorial limits of the United States who has voluntarily taken up, within said limits, his residence separate and apart from any tribe of Indians therein, and has adopted the habits of civilized life, is hereby declared to be a citizen of the United States, and is entitled to all the rights, privileges, and immunities of such citizens, whether said Indian has been or not, by birth or otherwise, a member of any tribe of Indians within the territorial limits of the United States without in any manner affecting the right of any such Indian to tribal or other property.
AI is not plenty for the internet since AI is often wrong. It doesn't verify facts. It only looks for how often something was said.
So what about the ones that didn't pay taxes and lived on Reservations? Why did the 14th make them American citizens why weren't they citizens of the state that they lived in. Why wasn't Elk of Elk v Wilkins a citizen when his case was decided by the SCOTUS in 1884 well after the 14th of 1868.You are misrepresenting the argument. Indians that live off the reservation in property they own do pay taxes. Look up the Dawes Act of 1877 which granted land to Indians and made them citizens.
Dawes Act (1887)
EnlargeDownload Link Citation: An Act to Provide for the Allotment of Lands in Severalty to Indians on the Various Reservations (General Allotment Act or Dawes Act), Statutes at Large 24, 388-91, NADP Document A1887. View All Pages in the National Archives Catalog View Transcript Approved on...
And every Indian born within the territorial limits of the United States to whom allotments shall have been made under the provisions of this act, or under any law or treaty, and every Indian born within the territorial limits of the United States who has voluntarily taken up, within said limits, his residence separate and apart from any tribe of Indians therein, and has adopted the habits of civilized life, is hereby declared to be a citizen of the United States, and is entitled to all the rights, privileges, and immunities of such citizens, whether said Indian has been or not, by birth or otherwise, a member of any tribe of Indians within the territorial limits of the United States without in any manner affecting the right of any such Indian to tribal or other property.
AI is not plenty for the internet since AI is often wrong. It doesn't verify facts. It only looks for how often something was said.
Last edited: