| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#12
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Abrogate the 14th?
On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, the one that says: "???Section 1. 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." You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if he does ever read it, he won't understand it. Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of times since then. Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order? You consistently miss the forest to bite on a tree. Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean? If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they haven't. Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in the SCOTUS decide. I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear. |
|
#13
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Abrogate the 14th?
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 13:07:32 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote: On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote: On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, the one that says: "???Section 1. 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." You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if he does ever read it, he won't understand it. Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of times since then. Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order? You consistently miss the forest to bite on a tree. Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean? If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they haven't. Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in the SCOTUS decide. I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear. The first sentence of the 1st amendment is pretty clear too but the interpretation is more far ranging so who knows what the courts might make of it. Realistically this is a question for the legislature, that has the responsibility to "To establish an uniform rule of naturalization" Section 8 (4) They are the ones who made up the law that says any child of a citizen is a citizen. The Constitution is silent on that. It certainly makes sense that they could more narrowly define what the 14th amendment is saying, much like you want them to define what the 2d amendment says. We let the courts run amok with the 1st amendment and you see where that ended up. KOCHPAC is now a "person" with full 1st amendment rights. |
|
#14
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Abrogate the 14th?
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote: On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, the one that says: "???Section 1. 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." You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if he does ever read it, he won't understand it. Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of times since then. Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order? You consistently miss the forest to bite on a tree. Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean? If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they haven't. Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in the SCOTUS decide. I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear. Yes, very clear. And the illegals are they under the jurisdiction? The courts do not take it, the executive order stands. Hope you survive the apoplexy. |
|
#15
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Abrogate the 14th?
On 10/31/18 1:53 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote: On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, the one that says: "???Section 1. 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." You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if he does ever read it, he won't understand it. Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of times since then. Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order? You consistently miss the forest to bite on a tree. Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean? If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they haven't. Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in the SCOTUS decide. I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear. Yes, very clear. And the illegals are they under the jurisdiction? The courts do not take it, the executive order stands. Hope you survive the apoplexy. Oh, if Pig Vomit promulgates it, an immediate suit will be filed against it, the court will rule against Pig Vomit, and the higher courts will let the ruling stand. |
|
#16
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Abrogate the 14th?
On 10/31/2018 1:57 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/31/18 1:53 PM, Bill wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote: On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, theÂ* one that says: "???Section 1. 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." You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if heÂ* does ever read it, heÂ* won't understand it. Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of times since then. Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order? You consistently miss the forest toÂ* bite on a tree. Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean? If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they haven't. Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in the SCOTUS decide. I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear. Yes, very clear.Â*Â* And the illegals are they under the jurisdiction?Â* The courts do not take it, the executive order stands.Â* Hope you survive the apoplexy. Oh, if Pig Vomit promulgates it, anÂ* immediateÂ* suitÂ* will be filed againstÂ* it, theÂ* courtÂ* will rule against Pig Vomit,Â* andÂ* the higher courtsÂ* will let theÂ* ruling stand. This whole matter has never been tested in a court including the SCOTUS. New territory. Step one in getting the 14th clarified is to do exactly what Trump is threatening to do since congress members just sit on their hands trying to look pretty without taking a position that may cost them a vote. |
|
#17
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Abrogate the 14th?
On 10/31/18 2:17 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/31/2018 1:57 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/31/18 1:53 PM, Bill wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote: On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, theÂ* one that says: "???Section 1. 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." You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if heÂ* does ever read it, heÂ* won't understand it. Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of times since then. Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order? You consistently miss the forest toÂ* bite on a tree. Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean? If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they haven't. Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in the SCOTUS decide. I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear. Yes, very clear.Â*Â* And the illegals are they under the jurisdiction? The courts do not take it, the executive order stands.Â* Hope you survive the apoplexy. Oh, if Pig Vomit promulgates it, anÂ* immediateÂ* suitÂ* will be filed againstÂ* it, theÂ* courtÂ* will rule against Pig Vomit,Â* andÂ* the higher courtsÂ* will let theÂ* ruling stand. This whole matter has never been tested in a court including the SCOTUS. Â*New territory.Â* Step one in getting the 14th clarified is to do exactly what Trump is threatening to do since congress members just sit on their hands trying to look pretty without taking a position that may cost them a vote. The 14th's first sentence says it all. It is perfectly clear. Trump's interest is in revving up the right-wing, racist stupidos in his base for the election. What is it about this plain English sentence you do not understand: "Section 1. 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." |
|
#18
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Abrogate the 14th?
On 10/31/2018 2:26 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/31/18 2:17 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 10/31/2018 1:57 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/31/18 1:53 PM, Bill wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote: On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, theÂ* one that says: "???Section 1. 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." You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if heÂ* does ever read it, heÂ* won't understand it. Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of times since then. Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order? You consistently miss the forest toÂ* bite on a tree. Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean? If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they haven't. Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in the SCOTUS decide. I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear. Yes, very clear.Â*Â* And the illegals are they under the jurisdiction? The courts do not take it, the executive order stands.Â* Hope you survive the apoplexy. Oh, if Pig Vomit promulgates it, anÂ* immediateÂ* suitÂ* will be filed againstÂ* it, theÂ* courtÂ* will rule against Pig Vomit,Â* andÂ* the higher courtsÂ* will let theÂ* ruling stand. This whole matter has never been tested in a court including the SCOTUS. Â*Â*New territory.Â* Step one in getting the 14th clarified is to do exactly what Trump is threatening to do since congress members just sit on their hands trying to look pretty without taking a position that may cost them a vote. The 14th's first sentence says it all. It is perfectly clear. Trump's interest is in revving up the right-wing, racist stupidos in his base for the election. What is it about this plain English sentence you do not understand: "Section 1. 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." The first sentence may say it all to you and many others but it doesn't mean it says it all to everyone. It was enacted primarily to afford citizenship to freed slaves. Legal scholars far more qualified than you or I continue to debate if it is intended to apply to anyone born here, especially of non-citizen parents and what, exactly, is meant by "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". You may have your sea-lawyer opinion and I might have a sea-lawyer opinion that is not consistent with yours. Only a court challenge that leads to a SCOTUS decision will clear it up. |
|
#19
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Abrogate the 14th?
On 10/31/18 2:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/31/2018 2:26 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/31/18 2:17 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 10/31/2018 1:57 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/31/18 1:53 PM, Bill wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote: On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, theÂ* one that says: "???Section 1. 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." You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if heÂ* does ever read it, heÂ* won't understand it. Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of times since then. Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order? You consistently miss the forest toÂ* bite on a tree. Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean? If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they haven't. Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in the SCOTUS decide. I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear. Yes, very clear.Â*Â* And the illegals are they under the jurisdiction? The courts do not take it, the executive order stands.Â* Hope you survive the apoplexy. Oh, if Pig Vomit promulgates it, anÂ* immediateÂ* suitÂ* will be filed againstÂ* it, theÂ* courtÂ* will rule against Pig Vomit,Â* andÂ* the higher courtsÂ* will let theÂ* ruling stand. This whole matter has never been tested in a court including the SCOTUS. Â*Â*New territory.Â* Step one in getting the 14th clarified is to do exactly what Trump is threatening to do since congress members just sit on their hands trying to look pretty without taking a position that may cost them a vote. The 14th's first sentence says it all. It is perfectly clear. Trump's interest is in revving up the right-wing, racist stupidos in his base for the election. What is it about this plain English sentence you do not understand: "Section 1. 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." The first sentence may say it all to you and many others but it doesn't mean it says it all to everyone.Â*Â* It was enacted primarily to afford citizenship to freed slaves. Legal scholars far more qualified than you or I continue to debate if it is intended to apply to anyone born here, especially of non-citizen parents and what, exactly, is meant by "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". You may have your sea-lawyer opinion and I might have a sea-lawyer opinion that is not consistent with yours.Â*Â* Only a court challenge that leads to a SCOTUS decision will clear it up. I know the history of the 14th Amendment. It says what it means and means what is says. After the election, Trump's "proposal" to EC its end will end up where it belongs...on the trash pile. |
|
#20
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Abrogate the 14th?
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/31/18 1:53 PM, Bill wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote: On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, the one that says: "???Section 1. 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." You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if he does ever read it, he won't understand it. Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of times since then. Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order? You consistently miss the forest to bite on a tree. Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean? If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they haven't. Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in the SCOTUS decide. I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear. Yes, very clear. And the illegals are they under the jurisdiction? The courts do not take it, the executive order stands. Hope you survive the apoplexy. Oh, if Pig Vomit promulgates it, an immediate suit will be filed against it, the court will rule against Pig Vomit, and the higher courts will let the ruling stand. So you are now a constitutional scholar? |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Pacific Singlehanded Sailing Association meeting Monday 14th | Cruising | |||
| Pacific Singlehanded Sailing Association meeting Monday 14th | ASA | |||
| Pacific Singlehanded Sailing Association meeting Monday 14th | General | |||
| Fishing near Shallotte NC on Apr 14th? | General | |||
Linear Mode
