HK wrote:
Calif Bill wrote:
"Spender" wrote in message
ews.com...
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 20:51:47 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
m...
After you figure that part out, please tell us how someone born in
a U.S.
hospital is here "illegally," since that someone is immediately a U.S.
citizen.
Really dumb****. The court has actually never ruled on the Anchor
Babies.
The 14th when it went in force did not include some people born in
the USA.
Did not include indians born on reservations. Maybe you should do a
little
reading on the subject.
The court has never ruled on it, so the law stands as it reads. Anyone
born in the U.S. is a U.S. citizen.

If *you* would do a little reading you would discover that indian
reservations are not technically part of the U.S. They are in essence
considered to be sovereign territory.


True, but people born on a reservation are considered US Citizens now.
Rules change as interpretations change. Why I said the court has not
ruled on the anchor babies, but they could very well declare them non
citizens. The law does not stand as it reads. As the court has not
really said what it reads.



Even the right-wing court we now have is not going down that road,
bilious. Sorry, the days of white boy rule are over.

Good old Chameleon Krause, able to change color at will. What do you
call people that hate whites? Is racist still appropriate?