I hope the Supreme Court changed the clear meaning of the 14th on birthright citizenship…
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Teflon Don
I'm back baby
What are you talking about? They have already ruled on semi automatic weapons. You lost
Teflon Don
I'm back baby
What is a simi automatic weapon?
Sure, but if we are going to start changing the clear meaning of the Constitution.
signalmankenneth
Verified User
Teflon Don
I'm back baby
If the Constitution were clear then why need the Court?
what will you do if the court rules against you on the 14th? Will you cry?
BTW you never answered the question. If the 14th was meant to apply to anyone born here then why did it take so long to make Injuns citizens?
Yakuda
Verified User
I thought you numbskulls said it was a "living breathing" document?
What is a simi-automatic rifle?
If you are talking about one shot, one trigger pull, that has already been settled.
Now, get back to your phone bank as you've got lots of car warranties to sell to make your end of month quota.
So has birthright citizenship!
Some things are not clear, this one is.
Not the question I asked.
NiftyNiblick
1960s Chick Magnet
The United States Constitution was written circa 1787
and is pretty much as up to date, relevant, and useful as anything written a quarter-millennium ago.
The United States in their current 50 state union configuration could NEVER agree on a new and improved one, however,
which is why I'm such a fervent advocate for partition.
We are presently a nation of totally incompatible people.
As a microcosm of the nation, this forum proves it.
and is pretty much as up to date, relevant, and useful as anything written a quarter-millennium ago.
The United States in their current 50 state union configuration could NEVER agree on a new and improved one, however,
which is why I'm such a fervent advocate for partition.
We are presently a nation of totally incompatible people.
As a microcosm of the nation, this forum proves it.
SCOTUS can't write new law.
Should we limit free speech on the internet too?
Elk V Wilkins
The law upon the question before us has been well stated by Judge Deady in the District Court of the United States for the District of Oregon. In giving judgment against the plaintiff in a case resembling the case at bar, he said:
"Being born a member of 'an independent political community' -- the Chinook -- he was not born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States -- not born in its allegiance."
Is that baby pooping on the Constitution?
Yes in Elk V Wilkins!
The law upon the question before us has been well stated by Judge Deady in the District Court of the United States for the District of Oregon. In giving judgment against the plaintiff in a case resembling the case at bar, he said:
"Being born a member of 'an independent political community' -- the Chinook -- he was not born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States -- not born in its allegiance."
Answer his question. Why was the Snyder Act needed?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
you're not very familiar with native american history, are you?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
The courts do not have power to change or interpret the Constitution