President Trump Wants an end to Birthright Citizenship for Illegals - Page 2 - Survivalist Forum
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

Advertise Here
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-23-2019, 07:33 AM
Wallimiyama Wallimiyama is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 241
Thanks: 525
Thanked 684 Times in 167 Posts
Default



Advertise Here

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jwoke View Post
Campaign Trump: Basically a white nationalist. "Somebody is doing the raping." "They aren't bringing their best." "Lock her up."

Elected Trump: "Wall? IDK. It's hard." "Nobody is going to prison."

2019 Trump: "the problem isn't ethnic replacement, it's the legal process! More immigrants the better, just go through the process! God Bless America!"

Traitorous clown.
Oh...poor Jwoke... you've got a bad case of Trump Derangement Syndrome...seek professional help.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Wallimiyama For This Useful Post:
Old 08-23-2019, 08:04 AM
alv7722's Avatar
alv7722 alv7722 is offline
Come and Take Them!
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Where I Am Now
Posts: 2,712
Thanks: 14,108
Thanked 6,993 Times in 2,037 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by countryfree View Post
This is risky.

I sure understand the logic, but if they start modifying the constitution, I'm afraid of other modifications they may be tempted to do.
It would NOT be 'modifying' the Constitution. Only making a correct interpretation of the 14thA. Birthright citizenship for Illegals was created by "Administrate Posturing". (phrase courtesy of Harmless Drudge) It can be undone via EO.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to alv7722 For This Useful Post:
Old 08-23-2019, 08:27 AM
HomeDefense's Avatar
HomeDefense HomeDefense is offline
Bad Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hellfire, Arizona
Posts: 3,778
Thanks: 2,196
Thanked 15,138 Times in 3,248 Posts
Default

I don't think it's possible in today's political climate to repeal the 14th Amendment. But it does need to be properly interpreted by the Supreme Court. It was never intended to cover illegals who come here to drop an anchor baby. The current political interpretation is an intentional misinterpretation.

Quote:
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.
Original intent of the 14th Amendment

The original intent for the 14th Amendment of 1868 was to grant citizenship to former slaves. While Lincoln freed the slaves with the Emancipation Proclamation, it did not specifically grant them citizenship. The former southern Democrat states refused to grant former slaves citizenship or the rights of citizens. The importation of slaves was made illegal with the Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1807. That meant in 1868 almost every former slave in the USA was born here. When the Republicans pushed through the 14th Amendment the former Confederate states were forced to grant citizenship.

It doesn't grant blanket citizenship to everyone born here. Children of diplomats have always been exempted because they are not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof."

Obviously, the original intent for the 14th Amendment is obsolete and has been distorted for political purposes. It was never intended to allow illegals to become citizens because they are anchor babies.

One way Trump could deal with this is through an executive order that redefines the 14th Amendment. The Left would take it to a court with an Obama-appointed social justice warrior federal judge who would rule against him. That would allow Trump to take it to the Supreme Court and force a correct interpretation.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to HomeDefense For This Useful Post:
Old 08-24-2019, 06:50 AM
ManyFeathers's Avatar
ManyFeathers ManyFeathers is offline
Why do you ask? 2 Dogs!
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 11,722
Thanks: 20,358
Thanked 39,883 Times in 9,543 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Basic Human Unit View Post
"Hey, my house is burning, I might as well set fire to my car as well!"
You lost me on that comment as to how it applies to my post


But hey.....

If you have Allstate, might not be a bad thing, they pay like clockwork......
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-24-2019, 02:47 PM
sabotage39k's Avatar
sabotage39k sabotage39k is online now
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,059
Thanks: 3,172
Thanked 6,197 Times in 2,977 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeDefense View Post
I don't think it's possible in today's political climate to repeal the 14th Amendment. But it does need to be properly interpreted by the Supreme Court. It was never intended to cover illegals who come here to drop an anchor baby. The current political interpretation is an intentional misinterpretation.

Quote:
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.
Original intent of the 14th Amendment

The original intent for the 14th Amendment of 1868 was to grant citizenship to former slaves. While Lincoln freed the slaves with the Emancipation Proclamation, it did not specifically grant them citizenship. The former southern Democrat states refused to grant former slaves citizenship or the rights of citizens. The importation of slaves was made illegal with the Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1807. That meant in 1868 almost every former slave in the USA was born here. When the Republicans pushed through the 14th Amendment the former Confederate states were forced to grant citizenship.

It doesn't grant blanket citizenship to everyone born here. Children of diplomats have always been exempted because they are not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof."

Obviously, the original intent for the 14th Amendment is obsolete and has been distorted for political purposes. It was never intended to allow illegals to become citizens because they are anchor babies.

One way Trump could deal with this is through an executive order that redefines the 14th Amendment. The Left would take it to a court with an Obama-appointed social justice warrior federal judge who would rule against him. That would allow Trump to take it to the Supreme Court and force a correct interpretation.
You maybe right so why hasn’t trump issued an EO? He threatened it before during the 2018 primaries. He talks about it, but no action. Is it because he knows this would be a biggy? Perhaps insulting many current US citizens going back generations? Don’t know, all talk and no action.
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-24-2019, 03:02 PM
HomeDefense's Avatar
HomeDefense HomeDefense is offline
Bad Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hellfire, Arizona
Posts: 3,778
Thanks: 2,196
Thanked 15,138 Times in 3,248 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sabotage39k View Post
You maybe right so why hasn’t trump issued an EO? He threatened it before during the 2018 primaries. He talks about it, but no action. Is it because he knows this would be a biggy? Perhaps insulting many current US citizens going back generations? Don’t know, all talk and no action.
I suspect an executive order to apply a different interpretation of the Constitution is illegal and outside the powers of a president. That's why it would force a federal lawsuit, which would then allow Trump to take the case to the Appeals Court, then to the Supreme Court.

You cannot take a case directly to the Supreme Court. A suit must go through a series of courts, each of which looks at the case a bit differently.

The purpose of an executive order is to allow the president to give directions to federal employees during times of emergency. An executive order does not apply to anyone who is not a federal employee. It can not create a law or alter existing law. That's the purvue of Congress. Using an EO to interpret the Constitution is not something the president can do legally. That is ultimately why we have a Supreme Court.

It is so very clear that the 14th Amendment's birthright clause is obsolete that I cannot see how Trump (and the American people) could lose that one. But he may have to break the law in order to force the issue.

I read that Canada was the only other country with a birthright rule and they have dropped theirs due to widespread abuse. That would leave the United State the last sucker standing.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to HomeDefense For This Useful Post:
Old 08-24-2019, 04:12 PM
sabotage39k's Avatar
sabotage39k sabotage39k is online now
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,059
Thanks: 3,172
Thanked 6,197 Times in 2,977 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeDefense View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabotage39k View Post
You maybe right so why hasn’t trump issued an EO? He threatened it before during the 2018 primaries. He talks about it, but no action. Is it because he knows this would be a biggy? Perhaps insulting many current US citizens going back generations? Don’t know, all talk and no action.
I suspect an executive order to apply a different interpretation of the Constitution is illegal and outside the powers of a president. That's why it would force a federal lawsuit, which would then allow Trump to take the case to the Appeals Court, then to the Supreme Court.

You cannot take a case directly to the Supreme Court. A suit must go through a series of courts, each of which looks at the case a bit differently.

The purpose of an executive order is to allow the president to give directions to federal employees during times of emergency. An executive order does not apply to anyone who is not a federal employee. It can not create a law or alter existing law. That's the purvue of Congress. Using an EO to interpret the Constitution is not something the president can do legally. That is ultimately why we have a Supreme Court.

It is so very clear that the 14th Amendment's birthright clause is obsolete that I cannot see how Trump (and the American people) could lose that one. But he may have to break the law in order to force the issue.

I read that Canada was the only other country with a birthright rule and they have dropped theirs due to widespread abuse. That would leave the United State the last sucker standing.
Right I understand all that. An executive order would direct justice department to not recognized birthright citizenship without requiring proof of the legal status of both parents to make determination. Then course lawsuits follow and Supreme Court eventually gives interpretation. Why doesn’t he do it?
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to sabotage39k For This Useful Post:
Old 08-24-2019, 06:34 PM
PeterEnergy's Avatar
PeterEnergy PeterEnergy is online now
Rom 14:1, 13; Jam 4:11-12
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 15,751
Thanks: 11,100
Thanked 29,033 Times in 10,165 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sabotage39k View Post
Right I understand all that. An executive order would direct justice department to not recognized birthright citizenship without requiring proof of the legal status of both parents to make determination. Then course lawsuits follow and Supreme Court eventually gives interpretation. Why doesnít he do it?
Precedence.

If he did that, what do you suppose his political opponents would do?
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to PeterEnergy For This Useful Post:
Old 08-24-2019, 06:51 PM
HomeDefense's Avatar
HomeDefense HomeDefense is offline
Bad Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hellfire, Arizona
Posts: 3,778
Thanks: 2,196
Thanked 15,138 Times in 3,248 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sabotage39k View Post
Right I understand all that. An executive order would direct justice department to not recognized birthright citizenship without requiring proof of the legal status of both parents to make determination. Then course lawsuits follow and Supreme Court eventually gives interpretation. Why doesn’t he do it?
I dunno for certain. Perhaps it would be his first illegal act as president, which might give the Dems what they need to push impeachment. Thus far, all they have is wild accusations.

The real issue is that it's not within the rights of the president to do that, which Obama found out with the large percentage of challenges to his illegal EOs that went to the Supreme Court. The last figure I saw said Obama lost 20 out of 24 cases. On some cases, even the liberal justices voted unanimously against him.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to HomeDefense For This Useful Post:
Old 08-24-2019, 08:02 PM
randolphrowzeebragg randolphrowzeebragg is offline
This is a great survival forum
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 1,396
Thanks: 240
Thanked 1,693 Times in 790 Posts
Default

Would you rather let in some commie spy who got citizenship by buying a birther visa or someone who risked her life by walking thirty miles through a desert and is willing to work in a meatpacking plant for close to minimum wage?
There are two kinds of Eastern Europeans: Those who admit to being commies and those who are commies and claim that they aren't.
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-25-2019, 12:36 AM
zumhug's Avatar
zumhug zumhug is offline
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: United States
Posts: 2,416
Thanks: 6,031
Thanked 4,231 Times in 1,556 Posts
Default

Look at all these pro-Constitution patriots in here trying to make it ok that yet another part of the Constitution is under attack with this President.

The 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th and now the 14th.

Hey, the President said it, it must be better than the Democrats doing it, right?

Do you bootlickers like brown or black polish better?
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to zumhug For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 07:46 AM
Harmless Drudge's Avatar
Harmless Drudge Harmless Drudge is offline
Weed 'em and reap
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: A once-free nation
Age: 41
Posts: 29,101
Thanks: 231,827
Thanked 120,867 Times in 23,950 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jojo View Post
Careful there, you will be throwing out the baby with the bathwater -



And that's just for starters. The 14th has 5 sections. BTW not a single Democrat I know personally is for chucking the 14th and I am not worried in the least it will happen as long as we maintain a Constitutional Republic.
The 14th Amendment did not establish jus soli citizenship. It is mere administrative posture. President Trump could have changed the practice with the very first words he uttered after he was sworn in as President two and a half years ago.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Harmless Drudge For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 07:47 AM
Harmless Drudge's Avatar
Harmless Drudge Harmless Drudge is offline
Weed 'em and reap
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: A once-free nation
Age: 41
Posts: 29,101
Thanks: 231,827
Thanked 120,867 Times in 23,950 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zumhug View Post
Look at all these pro-Constitution patriots in here trying to make it ok that yet another part of the Constitution is under attack with this President.

The 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th and now the 14th.

Hey, the President said it, it must be better than the Democrats doing it, right?

Do you bootlickers like brown or black polish better?
Jus soli citizenship is nowhere found in the 14th Amendment.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Harmless Drudge For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 07:54 AM
HomeDefense's Avatar
HomeDefense HomeDefense is offline
Bad Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hellfire, Arizona
Posts: 3,778
Thanks: 2,196
Thanked 15,138 Times in 3,248 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zumhug View Post
Look at all these pro-Constitution patriots in here trying to make it ok that yet another part of the Constitution is under attack with this President.

The 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th and now the 14th.

Hey, the President said it, it must be better than the Democrats doing it, right?

Do you bootlickers like brown or black polish better?
How is the 14th Amendment under attack when it has been intentionally misinterpreted for many years? The original intent for the 14th Amendment is clear and it was not to give birthright citizenship whenever anyone comes here and drops a baby.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to HomeDefense For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 08:01 AM
Goodwrench708's Avatar
Goodwrench708 Goodwrench708 is offline
SBs Resident Non Prepper
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Dominican Republic-Georgia
Age: 56
Posts: 5,292
Thanks: 5,002
Thanked 8,180 Times in 3,167 Posts
Default

Be careful for what you ask for

By declaring the original intent of the 14th Amendment is obsolete could cause the same issue with the 2nd Amendment

Opening up a new issue...could backfire on you
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Goodwrench708 For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 08:04 AM
HomeDefense's Avatar
HomeDefense HomeDefense is offline
Bad Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hellfire, Arizona
Posts: 3,778
Thanks: 2,196
Thanked 15,138 Times in 3,248 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodwrench708 View Post
Be careful for what you ask for

By declaring the original intent of the 14th Amendment is obsolete could cause the same issue with the 2nd Amendment

Opening up a new issue...could backfire on you
The original intent for the 2nd Amendment still applies today. Maybe even more than it did in 1791. The threat of political tyranny never seems to go away.

Both the 2nd and the 14th are intentionally misinterpreted by the Left.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to HomeDefense For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 08:04 AM
alv7722's Avatar
alv7722 alv7722 is offline
Come and Take Them!
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Where I Am Now
Posts: 2,712
Thanks: 14,108
Thanked 6,993 Times in 2,037 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sabotage39k View Post
You maybe right so why hasnít trump issued an EO? He threatened it before during the 2018 primaries. He talks about it, but no action. Is it because he knows this would be a biggy? Perhaps insulting many current US citizens going back generations? Donít know, all talk and no action.
As Obummer mentioned to his friend Putin on an inadvertent hot mike: "I will have more flexibility after the election".....
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to alv7722 For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 08:22 AM
sabotage39k's Avatar
sabotage39k sabotage39k is online now
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,059
Thanks: 3,172
Thanked 6,197 Times in 2,977 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterEnergy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabotage39k View Post
Right I understand all that. An executive order would direct justice department to not recognized birthright citizenship without requiring proof of the legal status of both parents to make determination. Then course lawsuits follow and Supreme Court eventually gives interpretation. Why doesn’t he do it?
Precedence.

If he did that, what do you suppose his political opponents would do?
As if he cares...
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-25-2019, 08:24 AM
sabotage39k's Avatar
sabotage39k sabotage39k is online now
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,059
Thanks: 3,172
Thanked 6,197 Times in 2,977 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeDefense View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabotage39k View Post
Right I understand all that. An executive order would direct justice department to not recognized birthright citizenship without requiring proof of the legal status of both parents to make determination. Then course lawsuits follow and Supreme Court eventually gives interpretation. Why doesn’t he do it?
I dunno for certain. Perhaps it would be his first illegal act as president, which might give the Dems what they need to push impeachment. Thus far, all they have is wild accusations.

The real issue is that it's not within the rights of the president to do that, which Obama found out with the large percentage of challenges to his illegal EOs that went to the Supreme Court. The last figure I saw said Obama lost 20 out of 24 cases. On some cases, even the liberal justices voted unanimously against him.
He said he could do through eo. Or was he lying?
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-25-2019, 08:26 AM
sabotage39k's Avatar
sabotage39k sabotage39k is online now
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,059
Thanks: 3,172
Thanked 6,197 Times in 2,977 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alv7722 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabotage39k View Post
You maybe right so why hasn’t trump issued an EO? He threatened it before during the 2018 primaries. He talks about it, but no action. Is it because he knows this would be a biggy? Perhaps insulting many current US citizens going back generations? Don’t know, all talk and no action.
As Obummer mentioned to his friend Putin on an inadvertent hot mike: "I will have more flexibility after the election"..... [IMG class=inlineimg]https://www.survivalistboards.com/images/smilies/cool.gif[/IMG][IMG class=inlineimg]https://www.survivalistboards.com/images/smilies/cool.gif[/IMG]
He won’t be interested then
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to sabotage39k For This Useful Post:
Reply

Bookmarks



Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net