ICE Arrest of Illegal Immigrant With Likely Intent to Deport Sparks Controversy and, Get This, Protests

To be honest, I think this is #TheResistance -- Bureaucracy League -- creating a Demonstration Model in order to put a bad face on Trump's immigration orders.

The woman arrested is a long-time illegal with a husband and two (legal) children. But she has an arrest record -- a fairly minor thing. She was arrested at an ICE work-site raid. The article doesn't say (Correction: It does say, but way down at the bottom; see Updates below) but I guess she was arrested for working illegally. (Yeah, and then a bit more.)

She reported in to immigration (apparently she had been doing so for a while, and the bureaucrats there were giving her a free pass) and was arrested by ICE.

Like I said, this feels an awful lot like what lawyers call a "test-case," where an agitation group casts its defendant for a morality play they want to stage. They pick the most sympathetic defendant, one who is only barely breaking the law they hope to defeat, and engineer things so that this will be the first prosecution -- and the first loss for the prosecution. And becomes the "face" of the defendant group in the media.

Think I'm crazy?

In anticipation that Garcia de Rayos could be taken into custody, the group Puente Arizona organized a rally outside the Central Avenue offices of ICE earlier Wednesday. The group advocates to stop the deportation of undocumented immigrants.

So this group just happened to rally outside the ICE offices before Garcia de Rayos showed up there. Almost like... oh I don't know, almost as if it was all a stage-managed affair.

Updates: Commenters say she had an arrest record for identity theft -- "criminal impersonation" -- which that AZ Central article actually does mention but very near to the bottom of the article, where they can expect lazy readers like myself, and 90% of the population, to have by then long stopped reading.

They also say she had a deportation order issued against her in 2009 which became final in 2013. I guess Obama's illegal Executive Orders stayed that final deportation order.

Finally, via Twitchy, it seems this woman has now been deported back to Mexico.

Good.

Posted by: Ace at 01:24 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1
Bam

Posted by: Kudzu King at February 09, 2017 01:26 PM (HSmrB)

2 Why should laws apply to illegals? Don't you know they're special?

Posted by: East Valley AZ at February 09, 2017 01:26 PM (PbH71)

3 You fucked up, you trusted us!

Posted by: Big Government at February 09, 2017 01:26 PM (VJOLZ)

4 So she's an illegal alien, married to a US Citizen and has two US born babies?

Posted by: CrotchetyOldJarhead at February 09, 2017 01:26 PM (i0ykY)

5 We can give you everything, we can take it away!

Posted by: Big Government at February 09, 2017 01:27 PM (VJOLZ)

6 >> oh I don't know, almost as if it was all a stage-managed affair.

She should refuse to sit in the back of the bus, too!

Posted by: Zombie Rosa Parks at February 09, 2017 01:27 PM (WQ9DL)

7 fire em all. bring in new lawyers.

Posted by: Joe Inaugurating 45 in DC at February 09, 2017 01:28 PM (eClek)

8 Twitchy now reports that she has been deported.

Posted by: Mark1971 at February 09, 2017 01:28 PM (gdnq1)

9 So, the undocumented immigrant was actually documented and it's just that no one followed the law. Who saw that coming?

Posted by: Flyguy at February 09, 2017 01:28 PM (dpJ62)

10 oh...and deport the lady.

Posted by: Joe Inaugurating 45 in DC at February 09, 2017 01:28 PM (eClek)

11 More than likely, this person has a stolen SS number too.

Posted by: Blake at February 09, 2017 01:28 PM (qC1Sy)

12 No se nada.

Posted by: Manuel Labor at February 09, 2017 01:28 PM (HgMAr)

13 I read that the hubby is illegal and the kids are legal. She was convicted of felony identity theft.

Posted by: thesgm at February 09, 2017 01:28 PM (crTpS)

14 Almost like... oh I don't know, almost as if it was all a stage-managed affair.

Mr. Suave to the red courtesy phone, please. Mr. Suave to the courtesy phone.

Posted by: Lance McCormick at February 09, 2017 01:28 PM (u0s1P)

15 She had a 2013 deportation order, she was a convicted felon for identity theft! I think this is a little more than minor thing!

Posted by: jhaley59 at February 09, 2017 01:28 PM (f4z3u)

16 She was convicted of felony identity theft.
Right Wing News has The Rest Of The Story.

Posted by: Veeshir at February 09, 2017 01:29 PM (UtXWA)

17 but all she wanted was a better life. through identify theft.

Posted by: Joe Inaugurating 45 in DC at February 09, 2017 01:29 PM (eClek)

18 Protests?! They must really be serious!
Any sign of street puppets yet?

Posted by: Spidly at February 09, 2017 01:29 PM (mzeaj)

19 Deport her and her entire family.

They are aiding and abetting a criminal alien.

Posted by: Zombie Rosa Parks at February 09, 2017 01:29 PM (WQ9DL)

20 Does legal husband mean a citizen? Because then I could see this being, "Law says we send her out, but you know what, she's coming back in the legal way because we're not actually against immigration."

Posted by: Flyguy at February 09, 2017 01:29 PM (dpJ62)

21 From the article:
For four years, federal immigration authorities have given Guadalupe Garcia de Rayos a pass to remain in the U.S. rather than deport her back to Mexico.

And this lil nugget:
Garcia de Rayos' husband does not have legal status and did not want to be identified. "Basically we are Americans," he said. "This is our country. We were brought here when we were teens."

I think I see the root problem...

Posted by: CrotchetyOldJarhead at February 09, 2017 01:29 PM (i0ykY)

22 I'm sure it's important to the person whose identity she stole. Or should that person suck it up for the greater good of the elites?

Posted by: Barb the Evil Genius at February 09, 2017 01:30 PM (FQKBL)

23 oh noes, the rounding up phase has begun. I question everything I believe in now. America should open its borders immediately so that the children of foreigners can thrive here at my kids' expense.

Posted by: Joe Inaugurating 45 in DC at February 09, 2017 01:30 PM (eClek)

24 Ship the bitch out!!!!!!!

Posted by: The Man from Athens at February 09, 2017 01:30 PM (70ves)

25 Afro-Turf'n Sock Removal

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 01:31 PM (WQ9DL)

26 For a long time, I've wanted Our Side to grandstand better. Identity theft is a big deal and hurts a *lot* of people.

The left makes sympathy plays, and we need to counter them with our own.

Posted by: Lance McCormick at February 09, 2017 01:31 PM (u0s1P)

27 "When something is illegal, it's illegal. Enforce the law."

Posted by: Zombie Sonny Bono at February 09, 2017 01:31 PM (OzJeO)

28 Were there professionally printed protest signs ? That always convinces me that it's Grassroots

Posted by: Pep at February 09, 2017 01:31 PM (ZLOD5)

29 Thought she was guilty of identity fraud, a felony?

How did she get married legally to an American - would indicate fraud there, as well as ID fraud to get work.

Posted by: Lizzy at February 09, 2017 01:31 PM (NOIQH)

30 She was convicted of felony identity theft.
..............

Bu...bu...but the chilluns!

Posted by: Don Lemon at February 09, 2017 01:31 PM (HgMAr)

31 but all she wanted was a better life. through identify theft.

Look, if you're going to start pretending that identity theft and forgery are "serious crimes," so-called, then you're gonna have to deport twenty million of us. You racist.

Posted by: Jorge Ramos at February 09, 2017 01:31 PM (OVUYQ)

32 If they have been here since they were teens (as the husband says) then they have had plenty of time to get their legal status. Why have they not done that? And identity theft on top of that? Yeah, don't think so.

Posted by: IC at February 09, 2017 01:31 PM (a0IVu)

33 16 She was convicted of felony identity theft.
Right Wing News has The Rest Of The Story.
Posted by: Veeshir at February 09, 2017 01:29 PM (UtXWA)

========================

This is what really angers me. The people wailing and gnashing their teeth over the so-called "injustice" of deporting these people never care to consider that these people buy or steal identities so they can remain in the US.

Posted by: Blake at February 09, 2017 01:31 PM (qC1Sy)

34 Screw this, fight and win the hard sad cases first then the slam dunks become easier.

America is being taken away from American citizens and being given, literally to the denizens from the shit holes of the earth.

And we are paying for the priveledge of losing our country to boot.

Our on the books immigration policy is designed to diminish the white population of this country and will become an absolute fact if we do not get a handle on legal and illigal immigration.

Deport her and the millions more like her.

We can win this fight.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 01:32 PM (+lv+r)

35 >>"Basically we are Americans," he said. "This is our country. We were brought here when we were teens."

South Americans. Hombre.

Get. The. Fuck. Out.

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 01:32 PM (WQ9DL)

36 Basically I'm George Clooney

Posted by: Pep at February 09, 2017 01:32 PM (ZLOD5)

37 Lemme guess, without looking first:

Big doe eyes, sweet face, looks like she wouldn't hurt a fly.

Posted by: BurtTC at February 09, 2017 01:32 PM (TOk1P)

38 >>but all she wanted was a better life. through identify theft.

"And all I wanted was to keep my identity from being used by strangers, and maintaining my credit score" - Person whose identity she stole

Posted by: Lizzy at February 09, 2017 01:33 PM (NOIQH)

39 It pisses me off that we have to be the bad guy here, but it's the truth. You don't get to pick and chose who gets to follow which laws. The laws have to apply to everyone equally. Of course, some people are going to be adversely affected by this. But actions have consequences.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at February 09, 2017 01:33 PM (KUaJL)

40 Any US citizen would be punished for working with a false SS number. Not very Christian of me, but I really can't care.

Posted by: josephistan at February 09, 2017 01:33 PM (7HtZB)

41 A few things

A: She had supporters there to watch her do this? Was she tipped off?

B: They haven't done anything for the four years she was here? no trying to get a green card or anything else like that?

C: Arrested the husband, a citizen? Is that a broad, sweeping use of the law? Pick on a sympathetic case and strictly enforce the law on them.

Posted by: Blanco at February 09, 2017 01:33 PM (tGBt6)

42 .....she was taken into custody, while her husband, two children - both
U.S.-born citizens - and a group of supporters watched in tears.

=====

They just happened to be there for her 'usual check in'? Uh huh....

Posted by: Tami at February 09, 2017 01:33 PM (Enq6K)

43 Given her crimes, I certainly hope this is the best shot the deep state has.

I have two words for all illegal aliens, regardless of how "productive" you are now:

Get the fuck out and if you want back in, follow the law.

Posted by: krakatoa at February 09, 2017 01:33 PM (RCS9o)

44 If they have been here since they were teens (as the husband says) then they have had plenty of time to get their legal status. Why have they not done that? And identity theft on top of that? Yeah, don't think so.

Posted by: IC at February 09, 2017 01:31 PM (a0IVu)

This! They had years to regularize their status, and chose not to try, evidently. Parasites.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 09, 2017 01:34 PM (WDdjT)

45 I'm sure it's important to the person whose identity she stole. Or should that person suck it up for the greater good of the elites?

Posted by: Barb the Evil Genius at February 09, 2017 01:30 PM (FQKBL)
............

Aw c,mon. What's a couple thousand on a bogus Macy's account? The kids needed shoes!

Posted by: Don Lemon at February 09, 2017 01:34 PM (HgMAr)

46 but all she wanted was a better life. through identify theft.

Look, if you're going to start pretending that identity theft and forgery are "serious crimes," so-called, then you're gonna have to deport twenty million of us. You racist.

*******

challenge accepted

Posted by: Joe Inaugurating 45 in DC at February 09, 2017 01:34 PM (eClek)

47 I heard on the news this morning that it's social security fraud, and she's a felon.

What does the law say about felons, social security fraud, and illegal aliens?

That's what has to be done.

Posted by: Moron Robbie at February 09, 2017 01:34 PM (/f1mm)

48 Her husband is also an illegal. She was busted using someone else's SSN to work by Sheriff Joe. I notice the protestors don't givea rats ass about the US citizen who had his or her identity stolen.

Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (All my hate cannot be found) at February 09, 2017 01:34 PM (O9qtX)

49 You don't get to pick and chose who gets to follow which laws. The laws have to apply to everyone equally. Of course, some people are going to be adversely affected by this. But actions have consequences.

Yeah. If you don't like a law, try to get it changed. I'm all for ending unenforceable (as in, actually unenforceable, not "we don't wanna" unenforced") laws, but there. Is. A Process.

Lack of enforcement is bad all around.

Posted by: Lance McCormick at February 09, 2017 01:35 PM (u0s1P)

50 Twitchy said 21 minutes ago that she's already in Mexico....

Posted by: Dirty Randy at February 09, 2017 01:35 PM (jjaLl)

51 Like I said, this feels an awful lot like what lawyers call a "test-case," where an agitation group casts its defendant for a morality play they want to stage.

The administration needs to find an illegal alien rapist or gang banger and make that person the face of the soon-to-be-deported.

The type of shenanigans we are seeing was predictable.

Does legal husband mean a citizen? Because then I could see this being, "Law says we send her out, but you know what, she's coming back in the legal way because we're not actually against immigration."

Posted by: Flyguy at February 09, 2017 01:29 PM (dpJ62)

That would be an easy way to diffuse the situation. Enforce the law and then demonstrate the administration aren't a bunch of "H8rz", while concomitantly affirming the right to deport all illegal aliens.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 01:36 PM (OzJeO)

52 I'm sure it's important to the person whose identity she stole. Or should that person suck it up for the greater good of the elites?

*******

have to break a few eggs to make an omelette, you know. All of western civ must suffer a few rapes, bombs, trucks of peace, forgeries, welfare frauds here and there to bring in the leftist vision for, uh let me check what the left says "all you fucking white people die to make way for new america" ...

right. that.

Posted by: Joe Inaugurating 45 in DC at February 09, 2017 01:36 PM (eClek)

53 I get that this case seems to be particularly sympathetic for the open borders protesters, but look at the flip-side: This is a major shot across the bow by ICE/DHS that they're not just interested in prosecuting/deporting violent criminal illegal aliens.

Maybe the point Trump's trying to make is: self-deport now, because we are coming for all of you.

Posted by: Lizzy at February 09, 2017 01:36 PM (NOIQH)

54 I wonder if she didn't know that she would be deported ahead of time, if she was willing to be the sacrificial lamb for the Narrative.

Posted by: josephistan at February 09, 2017 01:36 PM (7HtZB)

55 It's called undocumented identity borrowing. Harmless.

Posted by: Luis Gutierrez at February 09, 2017 01:36 PM (HgMAr)

56 This is not who we are. We are on the wrong side of history.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 09, 2017 01:36 PM (/tuJf)

57 Deport her anyway. If her family wants to go along, let 'em. If not, well, that's the way things go sometimes.

Posted by: Wolfus Aurelius at February 09, 2017 01:36 PM (UkGKj)

58 I'm not bringing the conversation here, but Chris Taylor, I responded to you, if you care, in the previous thread.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 01:36 PM (vur0q)

59 Twitchy said 21 minutes ago that she's already in Mexico....

Posted by: Dirty Randy at February 09, 2017 01:35 PM (jjaLl)

They got the border catapult working? Woohoo!

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 09, 2017 01:37 PM (WDdjT)

60 Here in South-Central PA we're likely deporting a Ukranian Immigrant who used fraudulent ID (made up out of whole cloth), so I don't see why it should be any different just because now it's someone Hispanic.

Posted by: Hikaru at February 09, 2017 01:37 PM (9TK8E)

61 Oh, and cases like this are not "the shadows." People in the shadows are the ones being exploited, paid peanuts in unsafe conditions, etc. That's a cluster of other issues.

This is broad f'ing daylight.

Posted by: Lance McCormick at February 09, 2017 01:37 PM (u0s1P)

62 >>>Lemme guess, without looking first:

Big doe eyes, sweet face, looks like she wouldn't hurt a fly.

Latina ass and jeans two sizes too small?

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at February 09, 2017 01:37 PM (DFcT7)

63 I wonder if she didn't know that she would be deported ahead of time, if she was willing to be the sacrificial lamb for the Narrative.

***

if so, they miscalculated.

Posted by: Joe Inaugurating 45 in DC at February 09, 2017 01:37 PM (eClek)

64 I see more than just a few fake, shared or stolen SS numbers since a large number of my WC claims I handle are out of CA.

Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at February 09, 2017 01:37 PM (Z9mio)

65 My parents were immigrants. Criminals from my family's nation of origin have always been deported with the rest of us giving no fucks. Well, except for some of the wiseguys who were directly affected.

The point is lawbreakers have got to go. Period. End of story. We have our own criminal class here, we do not need to import any other nation's.

Posted by: kallisto at February 09, 2017 01:37 PM (nNdYv)

66 It pisses me off that we have to be the bad guy here, but it's the truth. You don't get to pick and chose who gets to follow which laws. The laws have to apply to everyone equally. Of course, some people are going to be adversely affected by this. But actions have consequences.
Posted by: joe, living dangerously at February 09, 2017 01:33 PM (KUaJL)

"Yeah, what Joe, said, hic", said Hillary Clinton

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, who is now @SMcEvil on GAB at February 09, 2017 01:37 PM (kXoT0)

67 >>We are on the wrong side of history.

You mean Herstory.

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 01:38 PM (WQ9DL)

68 61 Oh, and cases like this are not "the shadows." People in the shadows are the ones being exploited, paid peanuts in unsafe conditions, etc. That's a cluster of other issues.

This is broad f'ing daylight.
Posted by: Lance McCormick at February 09, 2017 01:37 PM (u0s1P)

With the open cooperation of the Feds up until today.

Posted by: josephistan at February 09, 2017 01:38 PM (7HtZB)

69 Maybe the point Trump's trying to make is: self-deport now, because we are coming for all of you.

Preference cascades can work in both directions...

Posted by: Lance McCormick at February 09, 2017 01:38 PM (u0s1P)

70 "Garcia de Rayos' husband does not have legal status and did not want to be identified.....

Well, then, pack a bag for you and the kids and GTFO. Your wife already has a room for you booked in Nogales......

Posted by: Dirty Randy at February 09, 2017 01:38 PM (jjaLl)

71 The fact that your parents brought you to this country illegally does not make you Americans, it makes you a victim of your parents' decision to break the law and a parasite.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, who is now @SMcEvil on GAB at February 09, 2017 01:38 PM (kXoT0)

72 Lemme guess, without looking first:

Big doe eyes, sweet face, looks like she wouldn't hurt a fly.
----------------------------------
Latina ass and jeans two sizes too small?

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at February 09, 2017 01:37 PM (DFcT7)

Jeans and 4" heels.

Posted by: BurtTC at February 09, 2017 01:39 PM (TOk1P)

73 That's just another thing the viche GOPe never addresses; the fact that illegals have to commit more and more fraud to remain in the country.

It is dangerous to have 2 levels of law, one lax for 'immigrants' and another for plain old citizens.

But then again, these supposed conservatives like Bill Krystol just want us to be ethnically cleansed I guess.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 09, 2017 01:39 PM (4YGWz)

74 Oh, and as someone who has had his social security number stolen and used, fire and federally charge any of those government employees who knew the score.

Posted by: Moron Robbie at February 09, 2017 01:39 PM (/f1mm)

75 My God! Did no one see that 84 Lumber commercial on Super Bowl Sunday? Where's YOUR HUMANITY!!!!

Posted by: tu3031 at February 09, 2017 01:39 PM (qJhUV)

76 If this was in CA, she could run for Mayor.

Posted by: wth at February 09, 2017 01:39 PM (HgMAr)

77 >>You mean Herstory.

Xerstory.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 09, 2017 01:39 PM (/tuJf)

78 I thought the same thing, and the woman is attractive to boot. Perfect little case.

To me it's like the gay couple getting arrested for Sodomy in Texas that went to the Supreme Court.

Still, I think cases like this will promote a lot of illegals packing their shit up and leaving. And I don't know how a judge (long term) keeps the Executive Branch from deporting people that are here illegally.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 01:40 PM (m6M2c)

79 >>It's called undocumented identity borrowing. Harmless.

Posted by: Luis Gutierrez

Heh.
Journalist/illegal alien open-borders activist Juan Antonio Varges used to claim that he hadn't broken any laws except entering the country legally. Then someone checked his tax records and yep, he was using someone else's SS#. He changed his talking points, but he's still here, still happily getting work from MTV and prominent media outlets.

Posted by: Lizzy at February 09, 2017 01:40 PM (NOIQH)

80 Preference cascades can work in both directions...
Posted by: Lance McCormick at February 09, 2017 01:38 PM (u0s1P)

=======================

You mean this protest bringing the spotlight on an immigrant may have the opposite effect of what the protesters intended?

Bring on more protests!!

Posted by: Blake at February 09, 2017 01:40 PM (qC1Sy)

81 For a long time, I've wanted Our Side to grandstand better. Identity theft is a big deal and hurts a *lot* of people.

The left makes sympathy plays, and we need to counter them with our own.
Posted by: Lance McCormick

That, or start stealing a galactic fuckton of lefty id's.

"I'm sorry. Your college loan application has been denied"
"I'm sorry. Your car loan has been denied."
"I'm sorry. All of your credit cards have been cancelled"

Yeah. No. Big. Deal.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 01:40 PM (2w7OO)

82 QUIET ON THE SET!
....and....ACTION!

Posted by: Zombie Cecil B. DeMille at February 09, 2017 01:40 PM (XcOXh)

83 She was convicted of felony identity theft. No mention of the harm done to the person she stole it from.

I have no emotions for her family That was her responsibility. Deport her and keep going.

Less emotion and more heartlessness otherwise no America.

Posted by: grumpyguy at February 09, 2017 01:40 PM (6OScs)

84 If an illegal alien is arrested for committing another crime, why are we deporting her?

Why is she not serving time for that crime, *then* being deported?

Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 01:40 PM (3Liv/)

85 Alright then, husband's illegal too? Give 'em a choice, kids go into foster care, because you wanted them to have a better life and that's the shot they have, or they go back with you and can re-enter when they're 18 and without you.

Posted by: Flyguy at February 09, 2017 01:40 PM (dpJ62)

86 You miss me? You raycists.

Posted by: ¡Jeb! at February 09, 2017 01:40 PM (3hIZX)

87 78 I thought the same thing, and the woman is attractive to boot. Perfect little case.

To me it's like the gay couple getting arrested for Sodomy in Texas that went to the Supreme Court.

Still, I think cases like this will promote a lot of illegals packing their shit up and leaving. And I don't know how a judge (long term) keeps the Executive Branch from deporting people that are here illegally.
Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 01:40 PM (m6M2c)

====================

Ah...self-deportation.

That thing Trump called terrible in 2012.

*ducks*

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 01:41 PM (vur0q)

88 That's just another thing the viche GOPe never addresses; the fact that illegals have to commit more and more fraud to remain in the country.

It is dangerous to have 2 levels of law, one lax for 'immigrants' and another for plain old citizens.

But then again, these supposed conservatives like Bill Krystol just want us to be ethnically cleansed I guess.
Posted by: weft cut-loop

________

1000% yes

EVERY single working illegal alien is committing ID and tax fraud.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 01:41 PM (m6M2c)

89 Lemme guess, without looking first:

Big doe eyes, sweet face, looks like she wouldn't hurt a fly.

Latina ass and jeans two sizes too small?

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at February 09, 2017 01:37 PM (DFcT7)

No... kind of sweaty looking, shifty eyes..... but seems to have high cheek bones... Sen. Warren has scheduled a press conference.

Posted by: Dirty Randy at February 09, 2017 01:41 PM (jjaLl)

90 They couldn't get upset when dozens of American children were getting anything from partial paralysis to death from Central America's Enterovirus D68. So I'm not going to get upset when these families harboring fugitives are busted up.

Breaking eggs required, and some such...

Posted by: Rusty Nail at February 09, 2017 01:41 PM (S2VsH)

91 @71

The whole extending birthright citizen ship to the children of illeagls is insane and made up twattle from leftists and nimrods like Ted Cruz.

That would be like conferring citizenship to the progeny of an army invading America which is ludicrous on it's face.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 01:41 PM (+lv+r)

92 If they're trying for the omg you don't really want to deport someone like her sympathy, well, good luck with that.

See my response is, yes, yes, I do want to deport people like her. Also I want to hit the business (presuming she didn't provide fake documents re: legal status) with a moderate fine and ramp quickly up to crippling for serial offenses.

There's nothing difficult about this case to me. She's here illegally, off she goes. If you didn't want your family torn apart by your deportation, you should have come here legally.

Posted by: alexthechick - all your caps are belong to me at February 09, 2017 01:41 PM (mf5HN)

93 @48 Her husband is also an illegal. She was busted using someone else's SSN to work by Sheriff Joe. I notice the protestors don't givea rats ass about the US citizen who had his or her identity stolen.
-----------------------

They'll claim that if US immigration laws weren't so mean, then she wouldn't have to steal someone's identity.

Posted by: junior at February 09, 2017 01:41 PM (nsZ+m)

94 78 I thought the same thing, and the woman is attractive to boot. Perfect little case.

To me it's like the gay couple getting arrested for Sodomy in Texas that went to the Supreme Court.

Still, I think cases like this will promote a lot of illegals packing their shit up and leaving. And I don't know how a judge (long term) keeps the Executive Branch from deporting people that are here illegally.
Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 01:40 PM (m6M2c)

Anyone in the Horde struggling for work as a screenwriter, a movie on Lawrence v Texas is oscar bait waiting to be written.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at February 09, 2017 01:41 PM (KUaJL)

95 If they start protesting every deporation, they're gonna be reaaal busy. Even under Obama there were thousands.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 01:42 PM (39g3+)

96 I used to care.... Not any more... throw her ass out...

Posted by: deplorable donna at February 09, 2017 01:43 PM (O2RFr)

97 Twitchy now reports that she has been deported.
----------
To Iraq on a Venezuelan passport?

Posted by: andycanuck at February 09, 2017 01:43 PM (nlbfN)

98 They deported her? Jeeb, I hope her EBT card works in Mexico.

Posted by: wth at February 09, 2017 01:43 PM (HgMAr)

99 If it were California, she'd be President of the state Senate.

Posted by: Log Cabin at February 09, 2017 01:43 PM (Ve2ZO)

100 Lemme guess, without looking first:

Big doe eyes, sweet face, looks like she wouldn't hurt a fly.

--------------------------

Latina ass and jeans two sizes too small?

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at February 09, 2017 01:37 PM (DFcT7)

No... kind of sweaty looking, shifty eyes..... but seems to have high cheek bones... Sen. Warren has scheduled a press conference.

Posted by: Dirty Randy at February 09, 2017 01:41 PM (jjaLl)

Only pic I saw was dark, through the grill of the paddy wagon. Hard to tell what she looked like, exactly.

Posted by: BurtTC at February 09, 2017 01:43 PM (TOk1P)

101 EVERY single working illegal alien is committing ID and tax fraud.

Exactly right. And to pretend that these are "serious crimes" is Xenophobia, is what it is.

Posted by: Jorge Ramos at February 09, 2017 01:44 PM (OVUYQ)

102 the illegal with the felony record has been deported and several of the protestors have been arrested
#MakeAmericaSafeAgain #LawAndOrder

Posted by: ginaswo at February 09, 2017 01:44 PM (O+zHO)

103 The whole extending birthright citizen ship to the children of illeagls is insane and made up twattle from leftists and nimrods like Ted Cruz.

That would be like conferring citizenship to the progeny of an army invading America which is ludicrous on it's face.
Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 01:41 PM (+lv+r)

The two situations are completely different. In the first case, the U.S. exercises jurisdiction; in the later, the invading army does; this despite being within the U.S.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 01:44 PM (OzJeO)

104 She was arrested for identity theft - using someone else's social security number at her employer. Class 6 felony if I recall correctly.

This case is going to backfire on them in a big way. Using a stolen SS# is identity theft. The IRS goes after people every day for that income they never claimed that was actually paid to the illegal immigrant.

Posted by: Brian in New Orleans at February 09, 2017 01:44 PM (UBzPO)

105 President Honey Badger says GTFO.

Awesome.

Posted by: Jmel at February 09, 2017 01:44 PM (Nkwq2)

106 They deported her? Jeeb, I hope her EBT card works in Mexico.

She'll be back...

Posted by: deplorable donna at February 09, 2017 01:44 PM (O2RFr)

107 So someone who was braking the law was arrested....that really is terrible.

Next thing you know former Senators from NY won't be able to run global shakedown rackets, and former Presidents from Arkansas won't have free reign to rape whoever they want.

Posted by: 18-1 at February 09, 2017 01:44 PM (aZq03)

108 29 - "How did she get married legally to an American"

He's "undocumented" too. Not an American.

Posted by: Brian in New Orleans at February 09, 2017 01:45 PM (UBzPO)

109 That would be like conferring citizenship to the progeny of an army invading America which is ludicrous on it's face.
Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 01:41 PM

Agreed. But it's the current law and while I'd like it changed, we have to work within it for the time being.

Posted by: Flyguy at February 09, 2017 01:45 PM (dpJ62)

110 This really annoys me. I was an immigrant and did everything by the book. All the documentation, waited patiently, paid all the fees, waited some more, did all the medicals, never took welfare, pay my taxes, try to be the best citizen I can. And then you have illegals who do shit like this and expect to get sympathy!

Posted by: IC at February 09, 2017 01:45 PM (a0IVu)

111 Next thing you know former Senators from NY won't be
able to run global shakedown rackets, and former Presidents from
Arkansas won't have free reign to rape whoever they want.

Posted by: 18-1 at February 09, 2017 01:44 PM (aZq03)

These are indeed dark days......

Posted by: Dirty Randy at February 09, 2017 01:45 PM (jjaLl)

112 107 So someone who was braking the law was arrested....that really is terrible.

Next thing you know former Senators from NY won't be able to run global shakedown rackets, and former Presidents from Arkansas won't have free reign to rape whoever they want.
Posted by: 18-1 at February 09, 2017 01:44 PM (aZq03)

=====================

"I need another drink."
-Hilldog

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 01:45 PM (vur0q)

113 I understand and respect the birthright citizenship thing. However, I think it should not preclude deporation with parents. It doesn't matter if you are a US citizen, the humane and compassionate thing to do is keep the kids with the family. Until they are 18 at least, or 21, they get deported along with their crook parents. Then they can choose to come back if they want. Alone.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 01:45 PM (39g3+)

114 >>> Next thing you know former Senators from NY won't be able to run global shakedown rackets, and former Presidents from Arkansas won't have free reign to rape whoever they want. Posted by: 18-1 at February 09, 2017 01:44 PM (aZq03)

Hey hey now, let's not go crazy here!

Posted by: The Clinton, giving off massive shifty eye at February 09, 2017 01:46 PM (hvf9s)

115 Of course it was stage managed.

The question is "Will it work?"

Beats me. If I could predict the future I wouldn't be running a cheap novelty and emotionalism emporium on this hamster-driven website.

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet Can Help You Get Your Garden of Curses In Shape This Spring! at February 09, 2017 01:46 PM (hLRSq)

116 The whole extending birthright citizen ship to the children of illeagls is insane and made up twattle from leftists and nimrods like Ted Cruz.

That would be like conferring citizenship to the progeny of an army invading America which is ludicrous on it's face.

Fruit of the poisonous tree. Why do the kids get to reap the benefits of her lawbreaking?

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 01:46 PM (2w7OO)

117 I hear Ciudad Juarez is nice this time of year.

Posted by: wth at February 09, 2017 01:47 PM (HgMAr)

118 This really annoys me. I was an immigrant and did everything by the book.

Its like those of us who work hard, pay taxes, obey the law, and get sneered at, mocked, and abused by those who do none of that and live off us.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 01:47 PM (39g3+)

119 I see a huge influx of illegals currently living across the US taking refuge in states like California and New York.

I just know living in AZ, when SB1070 passed, you NOTICED less illegal aliens walking around and other people did as well.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 01:47 PM (m6M2c)

120 I hope her kids speak Spanish. Will make the transition for them in Meheeco a lot smoother.

Posted by: cicerokid at February 09, 2017 01:47 PM (vJE0v)

121 Gringoes. Can't live weeth them, can't keel them.

Posted by: ¡Jeb! at February 09, 2017 01:47 PM (3hIZX)

122 As far as media power plays go this lady's case is perfect for their purposes. BREAKING UP FAMILIES!

I knew this sort of thing could happen because I have a friend who, for a few years, was an illegal. His mom and dad (Scottish immigrants) were mad at him and when they applied for citizenship they included his brother and sister but not him in the application process (I don't know all the details, just going from memory). But he's legal now because he joined the Navy. He's a school teacher (GI Bill) at a charter school (he teaches Latin and math).

I guess no one wants hear about that though. BREAKING UP FAMILIES!

Posted by: Skunky Choom at February 09, 2017 01:47 PM (u/p7K)

123 Not that I pay any actual taxes. I don't earn enough annually to pay anything.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 01:47 PM (39g3+)

124 Anyone in the Horde struggling for work as a screenwriter, a movie on Lawrence v Texas is oscar bait waiting to be written.
Posted by: joe, living dangerously
________

So I'll finally get to be a movie star?

Posted by: Low Information Ex-President at February 09, 2017 01:47 PM (77i7V)

125 The two situations are completely different. In the first case, the
U.S. exercises jurisdiction; in the later, the invading army does; this
despite being within the U.S.
---
No, the situation is nearly identical save for the arms involved, since the aliens are encouraged to come here in order to colonize us.

Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 01:47 PM (3Liv/)

126 Oh, and cases like this are not "the shadows." People in the shadows are the ones being exploited, paid peanuts in unsafe conditions, etc. That's a cluster of other issues.
Posted by: Lance McCormick

OSHA issues a report monthly on injuries and fatalities across industries in the nation. Want to guess who has the highest number of fatalities? Mexican nationals that get jobs doing construction or other manual labor. Most speak little to no English and they are put in very dangerous situations with no safety training. I've read these reports and they are pretty bad.

Posted by: Cheri at February 09, 2017 01:47 PM (oiNtH)

127 The two situations are completely different. In the first case, the U.S. exercises jurisdiction; in the later, the invading army does; this despite being within the U.S.
***
Actually, *by definition* this is incorrect.

If they US is functionally exercising jurisdiction the illegal parent is not in the United States, it is solely by the failure of the US exercising jurisdiction that a child of an illegal is born here.

Therefore no child of an illegal can be a citizen whether or not they are born inside the US, and frankly any such citizenship awarded his false and should be revoked.

Posted by: 18-1 at February 09, 2017 01:48 PM (aZq03)

128 >>>No... kind of sweaty looking, shifty eyes..... but seems to have high cheek bones...
Posted by: Dirty Randy at February 09, 2017 01:41 PM (jjaLl)

Sorry, se�ora, got to go then!!! Necesitas tener una big booty to stay!! Hasta la vista!

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at February 09, 2017 01:48 PM (DFcT7)

129 That would be like conferring citizenship to the progeny of an army invading America which is ludicrous on it's face.
Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 01:41 PM

**********

plus, each soldier of an invading army would be granted habeus by Judge Robart.

Posted by: Joe Inaugurating 45 in DC at February 09, 2017 01:48 PM (eClek)

130 I understand and respect the birthright citizenship thing.

How?

Why do the kids get to benefit from their parent's lawlessness?

Why can I rob a bank and on the way out of town give it yo a homeless guy and him get to keep it? He didn't break the law.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 01:48 PM (2w7OO)

131 The Deep State in Action.

Just like the EPA losing all those court cases to environmental groups.

Some people need to be reassigned. Preferably to Embassies in Ghana, Mozambique, Retardistan, and the like.

Posted by: rd at February 09, 2017 01:48 PM (iT57s)

132 EVERY single working illegal alien is committing ID and tax fraud.
Posted by: Maritime
-------------------

Who is the Dem politician that just recently admitted - in a filmed/televised speech, no less - that most of his extended family has fake SSN #s & IDs? Committing fraud.
I just saw this in the last few days...

Posted by: Chi at February 09, 2017 01:48 PM (g7Suk)

133 Why can I rob a bank and on the way out of town give it yo a homeless guy and him get to keep it? He didn't break the law.

*can't.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 01:49 PM (2w7OO)

134 @103

We have no jurisdiction over citizens of another country other than that they now have to go through a process of removal that congress has constitutional authority to regulate and the 14th ammendment simply does not apply here.

If a pregnant woman steps one foot onto our borders and drops a kid, that kid is suddenly American?

Bull fucking shit.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 01:49 PM (+lv+r)

135 Fruit of the poisonous tree. Why do the kids get to reap the benefits of her lawbreaking?
Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 01:46 PM (2w7OO)

Because conviction should not work corruption of blood?

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 01:49 PM (OzJeO)

136 113 I understand and respect the birthright citizenship thing. However, I think it should not preclude deporation with parents. It doesn't matter if you are a US citizen, the humane and compassionate thing to do is keep the kids with the family. Until they are 18 at least, or 21, they get deported along with their crook parents. Then they can choose to come back if they want. Alone.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 01:45 PM (39g3+)

It's really not clear that that's what the 14th amendment says.
"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."

it's the "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" which would seem to say that the 14th amendment is not saying "anyone who shows up here 9 months pregnant and has a kid has a kid who is a US citizen."

They were trying to craft a law that said "former slaves are now citizens." not a birth right citizenship law.

Whatever, another battle that the courts have settled for us I guess.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 09, 2017 01:49 PM (wmaTe)

137 I do not understand how two foreign nationals, here illegally, can have a baby and that baby is automatically a US citizen. In fact, I don't think there is a rationale for that that I could even begin to agree with.

Posted by: Dirty Randy at February 09, 2017 01:49 PM (jjaLl)

138
This case is going to backfire on them in a big way. Using a stolen SS# is identity theft. The IRS goes after people every day for that income they never claimed that was actually paid to the illegal immigrant.
Posted by: Brian in New Orleans at February 09, 2017 01:44 PM (UBzPO)

Plus the state tries to recoup benefits paid out

Posted by: Apu Nahasapeemapetilon at February 09, 2017 01:49 PM (lKyWE)

139 If Trump deports Jose Antonio Vargas, I might just suck the President's dick.
And I don't even swing that way, but it wouldn't matter. That much winning deserves a thank you.

Posted by: Rusty Nail at February 09, 2017 01:49 PM (S2VsH)

140 Question...what is stopping these illegal aliens from going through the process to become American citizens? I live in the Peoples Republic of (Southern) California and it has become Northern Mexico. I am so sick of this shit.

Back to lurking...

Posted by: I Be That Chick at February 09, 2017 01:50 PM (S/qwI)

141 I understand and respect the birthright citizenship thing.

I dunno.

If your parents are permanent residents, then yes, birthright citizenship makes sense.�But if they're here on work visas? Student visas? If they're tourists? Illegal immigrants? Maybe you ought to have to start from scratch.

Posted by: Geronimo Stilton at February 09, 2017 01:50 PM (OVUYQ)

142 Posted by: IC at February 09, 2017 01:45 PM (a0IVu)

My sense is that the people who come here legally are for the most part very ticked off by illegals who garner the system and get to stay scot free.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 09, 2017 01:50 PM (fDdVG)

143 139 If Trump deports Jose Antonio Vargas, I might just suck the President's dick.
And I don't even swing that way, but it wouldn't matter. That much winning deserves a thank you.

And ships Soros to Russia...

Posted by: deplorable donna at February 09, 2017 01:50 PM (O2RFr)

144
If a pregnant woman steps one foot onto our borders and drops a kid, that kid is suddenly American?

Bull fucking shit.

********

amen.

These rules have been designed by people who hate america over the last 50 years while normal folks slept through it all.

Posted by: Joe Inaugurating 45 in DC at February 09, 2017 01:50 PM (eClek)

145 @135, PoliticalHat, I'm with rickl on this. I don't approve of birthright citizenship for people who were here illegally, and I don't consider it some cosmic blessing that the kids lucked out on. It's just one more criminal act, IMO.

Posted by: sunny-dee at February 09, 2017 01:50 PM (QAOZh)

146 ""Like I said, this feels an awful lot like what lawyers call a "test-case," where an agitation group casts its defendant for a morality play they want to stage.""

--

I haven't seen this angle on anywhere else (re: this event). Really interesting. I believe it.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 09, 2017 01:50 PM (lVcuh)

147 Being born in America makes you American, that's how its always been. The fact that people break the law to take advantage of that means we need to enforce the law and protect our borders better. With proper immigration enforcement, proper protection of the border, ending welfare for non-citzens, hammering businesses that hire illegals etc, that wouldn't be a significant issue any longer.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 01:50 PM (39g3+)

148 If a pregnant woman steps one foot onto our borders and drops a kid, that kid is suddenly American?

Bull fucking shit.
---
Exactly this.

That child is no countryman of mine.

Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 01:51 PM (3Liv/)

149 But who's going to pick my lettuce?

Posted by: Don Lemon at February 09, 2017 01:51 PM (HgMAr)

150
Off Simpsons sock

Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at February 09, 2017 01:51 PM (lKyWE)

151 140 Question...what is stopping these illegal aliens from going through the process to become American citizens? I live in the Peoples Republic of (Southern) California and it has become Northern Mexico. I am so sick of this shit.

Back to lurking...
Posted by: I Be That Chick at February 09,

I'm in NorCal same thing here.... Oh, and come on in the waters fine... Don't be a stranger... We need new blood...

Posted by: deplorable donna at February 09, 2017 01:51 PM (O2RFr)

152 I'm reminded of the 94 year-old woman that the NAACP/ACLU found in NC as an example of why voter ID was a bad idea. ONE person they found, but an elderly (bonus!) black (bonus!) lady (bonus!).

She had been through three name changes, but had not carried through on various documents. Thus, obtaining an ID would have imposed an 'unreasonable burden'.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 09, 2017 01:51 PM (ZO497)

153 I understand and respect the birthright citizenship thing.

How?

Why do the kids get to benefit from their parent's lawlessness?

Why can I rob a bank and on the way out of town give it yo a homeless guy and him get to keep it? He didn't break the law.
Posted by: rickb223
_________

My problem with birthright citizenship is I'm an originalist and that Amendment was meant for slaves that had been in the US for generations after we had just fought a civil war ending slavery.

Not for illegals running across the border and having a kid to get their lifetime freebies.

Do we have 5 SC members willing to go along with that? Probably not.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 01:51 PM (m6M2c)

154 Fruit of the poisonous tree. Why do the kids get to reap the benefits of her lawbreaking?

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 01:46 PM (2w7OO)

Change the law, so that birthright citizenship only accrues to offspring of people with legal permanent resident status. Not tourists, not visitors, not student visas, and not border jumpers.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 09, 2017 01:51 PM (WDdjT)

155 If your parents are permanent residents, then yes, birthright citizenship makes sense. But if they're here on work visas? Student visas? If they're tourists? Illegal immigrants? Maybe you ought to have to start from scratch.

If that's what the law was changed to, it wouldn't particularly upset me either. I'm just arguing that being born in the USA doesn't necessarily mean the parents (and you) are un-deportable.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 01:52 PM (39g3+)

156 I do not understand how two foreign nationals, here illegally, can have a baby and that baby is automatically a US citizen. In fact, I don't think there is a rationale for that that I could even begin to agree with.

Posted by: Dirty Randy at February 09, 2017 01:49 PM (jjaLl)

Agreed.

Parents can make all sorts of decisions that are bad for their children. We can feel bad for those children, but that does not mean we have any more humanitarian responsibility than we do for any of the rest of the humans on this planet.

They're not Americans.

Posted by: BurtTC at February 09, 2017 01:52 PM (TOk1P)

157
Only pic I saw was dark, through the grill of the paddy wagon. Hard to tell what she looked like, exactly.

Posted by: BurtTC at February 09, 2017 01:43 PM (TOk1P)
__________________________________

I'd hit it....

*hic*

Posted by: Hillary Clinton at February 09, 2017 01:52 PM (HSmrB)

158 Because conviction should not work corruption of blood?
Posted by: The Political Hat

So if momma robs a bank and gives the money to the kid, the kid gets to keep it?

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 01:52 PM (2w7OO)

159 I'm reminded of the 94 year-old woman that the NAACP/ACLU found in NC as an example of why voter ID was a bad idea. ONE person they found, but an elderly (bonus!) black (bonus!) lady (bonus!).

She had been through three name changes, but had not carried through on various documents. Thus, obtaining an ID would have imposed an 'unreasonable burden'.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc.
-------------

This, BTW, was the basis for the DoJ lawsuit against NC's voter ID law.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 09, 2017 01:52 PM (ZO497)

160 Oh, and another reason why the invading horde example is so damn spot on, is that in the current era we have a poor understanding of the way invasions actually work historically.

Yes, in WWII countries sent large military groups who would raise their flag over cities and regions and conquer (or liberate) them.

Historically though invasions occurred when tribes - with men, women, and children moved into an area nominally claimed by someone else.

There might be fighting...or not. The invaders might make no formal claims to sovereignty. However, if the nominal overlords did not either force the invaders back out, or at least force them to culturally assimilate the area would be lost.

This is why, for example, Asia Minor is Turkish today.

Posted by: 18-1 at February 09, 2017 01:53 PM (aZq03)

161 Well, obviously, arresting *certain people* for felonies makes you "like the Nazis."

Because FRAMGZLDZ WHERES MY MEDS?!?!?!

Seriously, how do people sleep at night after saying shit like that?

Then again, Dems believe they should be given a pass on vote fraud Because Virtue, why not identity theft, tax fraud, and maybe a little DWI and DUI here and there?

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at February 09, 2017 01:53 PM (wB8Tg)

162 I know a family who are Indians. Their son was born in the USA so he is a citizen but the parents are not. (I Do not think this should have happened BTW) After baby was born the family went back to India and he is growing up there- there is nothing horrible about it and this needs to happen with every family of illegal parents with US citizen children, no matter what country they are from.

Posted by: It's me at February 09, 2017 01:53 PM (xGt2P)

163 The 14th Amendment is going to have be challenged & clarified sooner or later.

Posted by: josephistan at February 09, 2017 01:53 PM (7HtZB)

164 Harry Paratestes, I don't think there is any case law on birthright citizenship. There are assumptions, but I don't think any have ever attacked the actual meaning.

And props to Geronimo for stating it well -- if you're here permanently, kids get birthright citizenship. If you're here temporarily / illegally, nada.

Which is literally how EVERY SINGLE OTHER COUNTRY ON EARTH does it.

Posted by: sunny-dee at February 09, 2017 01:53 PM (QAOZh)

165 It's really not clear that that's what the 14th amendment says.

...

They were trying to craft a law that said "former slaves are now citizens." not a birth right citizenship law.
---
Maybe it's time to repeal the 14th amendment.

It's not like there are any slaves left for it to apply to.

Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 01:53 PM (3Liv/)

166 DJT won't be President long if he can't handle this. I expect Mr Trump to give them a full load of tweets. Democrats will call for Twitter to be shut down if this keeps on.

Posted by: Ok at February 09, 2017 01:54 PM (K2SnJ)

167 Kabuki Theatre- for leftist dolts!

Posted by: Twin Cities Daydrunk- your subzero Hero at February 09, 2017 01:54 PM (kVX3W)

168 My heart is hardened. The Left, deal with it.

Posted by: NaCly Dog at February 09, 2017 01:54 PM (u82oZ)

169 I seem to recall about a year ago that police busted up some hotels in CA that specialized in hosting Chines citizens who would come to America to give birth so that their baby could be an anchor to get the rest of the Chinese family in, particularly the grandparents who then "retire" to the US to suck up all of the entitlements.

Foreigners have been gaming the birthright citizenship in so many ways, for so long, it needs to end.

Posted by: Lizzy at February 09, 2017 01:54 PM (NOIQH)

170 I just want either Sean Spicer or PDJT to have a press conference with a big old chart of the USA labor participation rate. Showing that it has done nothing but nosedive since the year 2,000.

Then point to the part of the graph which shows non-employed, then say, 'Within this year, 100 million Americans will be on this side of the chart."

Only to finish with a 'Fuck You, No Questions' and an emphatic microphone drop.

I have a dream.

Posted by: E Pluribus Juan at February 09, 2017 01:54 PM (ZFUt7)

171 She had been through three name changes, but had not carried through on various documents. Thus, obtaining an ID would have imposed an 'unreasonable burden'.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc.

Her problem. Not mine.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 01:55 PM (2w7OO)

172 "It's not like there are any slaves left for it to apply to"
H1B visa holders

Posted by: Ok at February 09, 2017 01:55 PM (K2SnJ)

173 @140 what is stopping these illegal aliens from going through the process to become American citizens? I live in the Peoples Republic of (Southern) California and it has become Northern Mexico. I am so sick of this shit.
--------------------

There's a long wait involved. And some luck.

Posted by: junior at February 09, 2017 01:55 PM (nsZ+m)

174 So if momma robs a bank and gives the money to the kid, the kid gets to keep it?

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 01:52 PM (2w7OO)
-------------------------
Only the money with blood on it.

Posted by: RioBravo at February 09, 2017 01:55 PM (SsblQ)

175 >>> I guess no one wants hear about that though. BREAKING UP FAMILIES! Posted by: Skunky Choom at February 09, 2017 01:47 PM (u/p7K)

I know a liberal whose son FINALLY married his very long term girlfriend. She is illegal, came over here as a kid. They were afraid she would be deported in the era of Trump, so got married to help keep her in the country.

I'm hoping it works out for them. But paranoid much? Trump derangement syndrome has far reaching effects.

Posted by: LizLem at February 09, 2017 01:55 PM (hvf9s)

176 We could invade Mexico again and keep it this time. That would fix some of the problemo.

Posted by: torabora at February 09, 2017 01:55 PM (LbWUK)

177 After baby was born the family went back to India and he is growing up there- there is nothing horrible about it and this needs to happen with every family of illegal parents with US citizen children, no matter what country they are from.
Posted by: It's me

________

It's funny, but we make it like sending these people back is like sending a Jew to Nazi Germany where a gas chamber is waiting for them.

People save all year to vacation to Mexico.

This is about one thing: MONEY!

They make more money here than in mexico, so they want to stay here.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 01:55 PM (m6M2c)

178 H1B visa holders

Posted by: Ok at February 09, 2017 01:55 PM (K2SnJ)

POW!

Posted by: Dirty Randy at February 09, 2017 01:55 PM (jjaLl)

179 No, the situation is nearly identical save for the arms involved, since the aliens are encouraged to come here in order to colonize us.

Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 01:47 PM (3Liv/)

Unless they are acting as agents of a foreign power, the situation does not apply.

In the Common Law, jus soli required presence in the country, application of that countries jurisdiction, and "legence" of the parents -- the last of which was tossed aside by the 14th Amendment.

Actually, *by definition* this is incorrect.

If they US is functionally exercising jurisdiction the illegal parent is not in the United States, it is solely by the failure of the US exercising jurisdiction that a child of an illegal is born here.

Therefore no child of an illegal can be a citizen whether or not they are born inside the US, and frankly any such citizenship awarded his false and should be revoked.

Posted by: 18-1 at February 09, 2017 01:48 PM (aZq03)

If the U.S. law applies and is within incorporated territory, that they are born in the United State and under the jurisdiction thereof.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 01:56 PM (OzJeO)

180 >>>Kabuki Theatre- for leftist dolts!

Needs to be bukkake theater!

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at February 09, 2017 01:56 PM (DFcT7)

181 >>We could invade Mexico again and keep it this time. That would fix some of the problemo.

Yeah. We need every scumbag in Mexico City as a US Resident.

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 01:56 PM (WQ9DL)

182 @147

That is simply not true.

The 14th Amendment didn't make American Indians American citizens that was done by an act of congress many years later.

The 14th amendment was passed to deal with a specific inequality of citizienship rights of blacks after the civil war. Nothing more.

Congress has plenary power over immigration and naturalization and can confer or rescind at its discretion.

The 14th ammendment simply does not apply to the progeny of illegal aliens, green cards holder, visa over stays period.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 01:57 PM (+lv+r)

183 Trump now has Sessions in the saddle.

Arrange a raid on a MS13 drug house. Have cameras everywhere, including. Make it a viral You-Tube video. Arrest/deport the tattoo faced cartel members. Make reality TV real again.

Repeat every couple weeks ... offer it as a Netflix or HBO series.
Another series would document raids on coyotes as they infiltrate our border with their mules. Make border patrol and control great again. Yippie ki yay.

Posted by: illiniwek at February 09, 2017 01:57 PM (RWmbm)

184
President Trump needs to set up trebuchets along the border. When they're caught load them in and fire them back. That should deter those wanting to make illegal crossings

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 09, 2017 01:57 PM (493sH)

185 Which is literally how EVERY SINGLE OTHER COUNTRY ON EARTH does it.

Posted by: sunny-dee at February 09, 2017 01:53 PM (QAOZh)
..............

That is not who we are.

Posted by: Barry Soetoro - AA, BFD, kook kite surfer at February 09, 2017 01:57 PM (HgMAr)

186 THE ORANGE VULGARIAN HAS STARTED! THESE FUCKING WINGNUTS ARE ROUNDING UP FOR THE CAMPS! OH GOD!

Posted by: The Left at February 09, 2017 01:57 PM (N6nk5)

187 >>Needs to be bukkake theater!

Bring your Poncho.

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 01:57 PM (WQ9DL)

188 The right: "Mexico is a crime-ridden corrupt shithole."

The left: "You racist asshats! Mexico is a wonderful country with beautiful scenery, great biodiversity and a rich, deep culture. Filled with people who have warm hearts and strong family values."

The right: "Mexicans illegally here should be deported home."

The left: "WHAT?!?!? SEND THEM TO *MEXICO*? YOU CAN'T *DO* THAT!!! WHERE'S YOUR SENSE OF HUMANITY AND DECENCY?!?!?!?"

Posted by: torquewrench at February 09, 2017 01:57 PM (noWW6)

189 the illegal with the felony record has been deported and several of the protestors have been arrested

Posted by: kallisto at February 09, 2017 01:58 PM (nNdYv)

190 President Trump needs to set up trebuchets along the border.

This would win us the Renaissance Faire/Maker demographic for all eternity.

Posted by: Geronimo Stilton at February 09, 2017 01:58 PM (OVUYQ)

191 She's already back in Mexico?

...what time does the Donkey Show start?

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 01:58 PM (WQ9DL)

192 The 14th Amendment is going to have be challenged & clarified sooner or later.
Posted by: josephistan
____________

I wouldn't want to challenge it until we had another conservative or two seated, and even then, I'm not optimistic.

It would mean millions could get instant citizenship if we lose.

I'm honestly surprised liberals haven't tried it earlier.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 01:58 PM (m6M2c)

193 If the Republicans were smart, they would being out the victim of the identity theft and let him talk about how much this poor innocent illegal alien screwed up his life and credit and finances.

And then they should roll the film of her getting deported, while reiterating that this isn't a victimless crime.

Posted by: Lord Dewclaw at February 09, 2017 01:58 PM (B8uVo)

194 147 Being born in America makes you American, that's how its always been. The fact that people break the law to take advantage of that means we need to enforce the law and protect our borders better. With proper immigration enforcement, proper protection of the border, ending welfare for non-citzens, hammering businesses that hire illegals etc, that wouldn't be a significant issue any longer.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 01:50 PM (39g3+)

...but no, that's not how it's always been.

1898 I believe was the big supreme court case. For the first 30 years of the 14th amendment, the "and exercising jurisdiction over" meant that, so a child born of aliens was not a US citizen.

Prior to the 14th amendment, it was even less of a question.

So from 1789-1898, you weren't guaranteed citizenship by simply being born here.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 09, 2017 01:58 PM (wmaTe)

195 If her husband and her two kids loved her, they would have gone with her to Mexico.

Why does her husband and her children hate her so?

Unfeeling, uncaring monsters, says I. Tossing their wife and mother over the border like so much trash. How evil is her husband? How evil are her children?

Monsters.

(No, I'm not kidding.)

Posted by: filbert at February 09, 2017 01:59 PM (K4zH2)

196 Bring your Poncho.

Posted by: garrett

Leave me out of it nativist Gringo.

Posted by: Poncho at February 09, 2017 01:59 PM (ZFUt7)

197 " why not identity theft, tax fraud, and maybe a little DWI and DUI here and there?"

There are documented cases of all of these. And they did think they could. And the ones that didn't get caught did get by with the crimes. (not caught means the crime was covered up by friends in right places)

Posted by: Ok at February 09, 2017 01:59 PM (K2SnJ)

198 My sense is that the people who come here legally
are for the most part very ticked off by illegals who garner the system
and get to stay scot free.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 09, 2017 01:50 PM (fDdVG)
Oh Lord yes. There is a big group of us legal immigrants who all voted for Trump and are very conservative and cannot stand this crap - we just have to keep it on the down low here in California. Literally smoke signals to each other.

Posted by: IC at February 09, 2017 01:59 PM (a0IVu)

199 Yeah. We need every scumbag in Mexico City as a US Resident.
Posted by: garrett

Come to Texas or SoCal.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 01:59 PM (2w7OO)

200 I LOVE bukkake theater

Posted by: Barney Fwank at February 09, 2017 01:59 PM (N6nk5)

201 190 President Trump needs to set up trebuchets along the border.

This would win us the Renaissance Faire/Maker demographic for all eternity.

Or Punkin chunkin...

Posted by: deplorable donna at February 09, 2017 02:00 PM (O2RFr)

202 124
Anyone in the Horde struggling for work as a screenwriter, a movie on Lawrence v Texas is oscar bait waiting to be written.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously

________

So I'll finally get to be a movie star?

Posted by: Low Information Ex-President

I'm good, but I'm not THAT good!

Posted by: Zombie Cecil B. DeMille at February 09, 2017 02:00 PM (XcOXh)

203 >>If the Republicans were smart, they would being out the victim of the
identity theft and let him talk about how much this poor innocent
illegal alien screwed up his life and credit and finances.

Yep - also, a lot of times they steal the identity of a child because it's clean, no chance of there being competing tax/credit info on record. So they're messing up their victim's credit record before they even reach adulthood.

Posted by: Lizzy at February 09, 2017 02:00 PM (NOIQH)

204 @193 If the Republicans were smart, they would being out the victim of the identity theft and let him talk about how much this poor innocent illegal alien screwed up his life and credit and finances.

And then they should roll the film of her getting deported, while reiterating that this isn't a victimless crime.
--------------------

Privacy rules would probably make it difficult (and possibly illegal) to figure out who the victim is.

Posted by: junior at February 09, 2017 02:00 PM (nsZ+m)

205 We could invade Mexico again and keep it this time. That would fix some of the problemo.

Posted by: torabora at February 09, 2017 01:55 PM (LbWUK)

I would prefer to make the rubble bounce.

First few bombing raids, we tell we're coming, tell them to get their citizens out of harms way, make sure they know the coordinates of the sites we are bombing, then bomb.

After one or two of those, I don't think we'd need a wall.

And if anybody wants to get funky about it, we can stop warning them ahead of time.

Sovereign nations have a right to defend their borders. We can do it the easy way, or we can do it the hard way.

Posted by: BurtTC at February 09, 2017 02:00 PM (TOk1P)

206 [Taps giveafuckometer] Nope. Doesn't budge a millimeter. Let's say this was intended as a test case. We can also think of it as the standard: You want to make this the face of Trump's efforts? Fine, we'll go for the most stringent enforcement down to this level. Make this the boundary of enforcement--anything more illegal gets the full force of the law.

Posted by: joncelli, Deplorable Yet Fuzzy at February 09, 2017 02:01 PM (1FhAQ)

207 203 >>If the Republicans were smart, they would being out the victim of the
identity theft and let him talk about how much this poor innocent
illegal alien screwed up his life and credit and finances.

Hahahahahah smart... hahahahaha...

Posted by: deplorable donna at February 09, 2017 02:01 PM (O2RFr)

208 >>Needs to be bukkake theater!

Bring your Poncho.

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 01:57 PM (WQ9DL)

It'll be like that time Gallagher took his show down a dark path, with his Watermelons of Diarrhea Tour.... man, why the hell did I buy front row for that??

Posted by: Dirty Randy at February 09, 2017 02:01 PM (jjaLl)

209 PoliticalHat, I'm with rickl on this. I don't approve of birthright citizenship for people who were here illegally, and I don't consider it some cosmic blessing that the kids lucked out on. It's just one more criminal act, IMO.
Posted by: sunny-dee at February 09, 2017 01:50 PM (QAOZh)

Approval is not relevant. Only the law.

My problem with birthright citizenship is I'm an originalist and that Amendment was meant for slaves that had been in the US for generations after we had just fought a civil war ending slavery.

Not for illegals running across the border and having a kid to get their lifetime freebies.

Do we have 5 SC members willing to go along with that? Probably not.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 01:51 PM (m6M2c)

Actually, during debate on the 14th, many members of Congress made it clear that they were stating a broader right that recoursed to the Common Law practice.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:01 PM (OzJeO)

210 Late to the thread, but I heard a report on Fox that the woman had a prior arrest record for identity theft. FWIW.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 09, 2017 02:01 PM (PY9jH)

211 She had been through three name changes, but had not carried through on various documents. Thus, obtaining an ID would have imposed an 'unreasonable burden'.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc.

I remember that. One would have to believe that Granny was not receiving Social Security or Medicare benefits because those require ID and other docs.

Just suppose that a person that has no legal identification for whatever reason one day wins a lottery for 10 million dollars. To claim their winnings they need to show legal ID. Who believes that they wouldn't run and get their ass to the DMV toot suite to get a state ID? Wouldn't matter is they were 100 years old with no car and lived out in the sticks. They would find a way. Voting? Not so much.

Posted by: Cheri at February 09, 2017 02:01 PM (oiNtH)

212 The right: "Mexico is a crime-ridden corrupt shithole."

The left: "You racist asshats! Mexico is a wonderful country with beautiful scenery, great biodiversity and a rich, deep culture. Filled with people who have warm hearts and strong family values."

The right: "Mexicans illegally here should be deported home."

The left: "WHAT?!?!? SEND THEM TO *MEXICO*? YOU CAN'T *DO* THAT!!! WHERE'S YOUR SENSE OF HUMANITY AND DECENCY?!?!?!?"
Posted by: torquewrench

And THAT is how you become a galactic troll grand master.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 02:01 PM (2w7OO)

213 Exclusive: Syria's Assad tells Yahoo News some refugees are 'definitely' terrorists

Let's send them all Robart's house

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 09, 2017 02:01 PM (493sH)

214 I am given to understand there are a lot of illegals who get an ITIN from the Treasury to pay taxes or be shown as a dependent out of country in Mexico
The ITIN historically has not been difficult to get, and the next step is to get, steal, buy or claim an SSN with faked documentation
(I wondered from time to time if getting an ITIN for a family member someone is supporting in Mexico would lead to that family member moving to the US to also work illegally, after all they have some sort of "legitimacy" and if that is another chain-illegal-immigration.

The IRS doesn't care, as long as the taxes are paid. The states don't care, as long as they can keep the accounts straight. The taxing agencies may actually be prohibited from releasing that information.
If benefits are involved the states get picky about bad SSNs or bad matches between SSN name and date of birth, but only to the extent that they won't provide bennies if there is a mismatch.

However, if ICE starts prosecuting for this, there will be a large chill in industries that use these workers. Canneries, line cooks, farm labor contractors, and ag workers are going to start being really worried.

I would expect prices of strawberries and blue berries and french fries to go up if this keeps up.

Posted by: Kindltot at February 09, 2017 02:02 PM (ry6W6)

215 So if momma robs a bank and gives the money to the kid, the kid gets to keep it?

Posted by: rickb223

**********

why punish the child for sins of the parents!@#$@#$@!%$

that's great.

Posted by: Joe Inaugurating 45 in DC at February 09, 2017 02:02 PM (eClek)

216 Bring your Poncho.

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 01:57 PM (WQ9DL)

A real poncho, or a Sears poncho?

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 09, 2017 02:02 PM (WDdjT)

217 Anyone remember the SNL commercial for the yardapult? "Daddy, Timmy's dead" becomes, "Prezy, Guadalupe's illegal".

Posted by: SFGoth at February 09, 2017 02:02 PM (dZ756)

218 >>Exclusive: Syria's Assad tells Yahoo News some refugees are 'definitely' terrorists

No. Shit.

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 02:02 PM (WQ9DL)

219
>>We could invade Mexico again and keep it this time. That would fix some of the problemo.

Yeah. We need every scumbag in Mexico City as a US Resident.
Posted by: garrett

And fifty more Democrat senators.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at February 09, 2017 02:02 PM (IqV8l)

220 206-

I threw away my giveafuck meter around 2010.

Posted by: Mr Aspirin Factory at February 09, 2017 02:02 PM (N6nk5)

221 193
If the Republicans were smart, they would being out the victim of the
identity theft and let him talk about how much this poor innocent
illegal alien screwed up his life and credit and finances.

And then they should roll the film of her getting deported, while reiterating that this isn't a victimless crime.

Posted by: Lord Dewclaw

Unlike Spielberg, I won't need CGI for this film. And don't get me started with Zombie Stanley Kubrick. I use big sets, but I'm not cerebral.

Posted by: Zombie Cecil B. DeMille at February 09, 2017 02:03 PM (XcOXh)

222 what is stopping these illegal aliens from going through the process to become American citizens?

Lack of will and need, mostly. I think you can't do it while living in the USA illegally mostly because of filing issues etc. You can't become a citizen while currently violating US law, for example.

So they'd have to leave and go back to whatever 3rd world craphole they came from and why do that if they can just stay here and get free stuff and Obamaphones?

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:03 PM (39g3+)

223 AOP gets it.

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 02:03 PM (WQ9DL)

224 "Garcia de Rayos' husband does not have legal status and did not want to be identified. "Basically we are Americans," he said. "This is our country. We were brought here when we were teens."

---------

Sovereignty be damned, they have decided they own what they steal.

Posted by: Decaf at February 09, 2017 02:03 PM (WrEuY)

225 Some sort of legal status will probably be given to many employed illegals, but hopefully not citizenship. They should all be required to sign up and be biometrically ID'd. They are not undocumented, they have documents in some other country, since they are foreign nationals. They are citizens, not our citizens.

Along with whatever deal is made, they should include the end to "anchor babies". That would be challenged, so wait till we have a couple more conservative supremes. But all illegals must sign up now, or no future chance of legal status. Signing up grants them a two-year temp visa, if they stay clean.

Posted by: illiniwek at February 09, 2017 02:03 PM (RWmbm)

226 Steal money from me, not the end of the world, I have more, I can make more.

Steal from me something of which I only have the one, that's an entirely different matter.

My Social Security number.
My ID.
My vote.

Deport!

Posted by: navybrat at February 09, 2017 02:03 PM (w7KSn)

227 Actually, during debate on the 14th, many members of Congress made
it clear that they were stating a broader right that recoursed to the
Common Law practice.
---
And we reject that.

What's your point?

Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 02:03 PM (3Liv/)

228 >>> Unfeeling, uncaring monsters, says I. Tossing their wife and mother over the border like so much trash. How evil is her husband? How evil are her children? Monsters. (No, I'm not kidding.)
Posted by: filbert at February 09, 2017 01:59 PM (K4zH2)

Related, and mentioned here before, how unfeeling do you have to be to encourage women and children to come here illegally? In the Coyote system of people smuggling they estimate 80% or more of them are raped or end up in trafficking. Monstrous indeed.

Posted by: LizLem at February 09, 2017 02:04 PM (hvf9s)

229 192 The 14th Amendment is going to have be challenged & clarified sooner or later.
Posted by: josephistan
____________

I wouldn't want to challenge it until we had another conservative or two seated, and even then, I'm not optimistic.

It would mean millions could get instant citizenship if we lose.

I'm honestly surprised liberals haven't tried it earlier.
Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 01:58 PM (m6M2c)

====================

How do you challenge a constitutional amendment?

I think you can challenge interpretations of the amendment, but unless you're talking about a constitutional amendment that actually changes it, you're not actually challenging it itself.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:04 PM (vur0q)

230 The IRS doesn't care, as long as the taxes are paid.

Posted by: Kindltot at February 09, 2017 02:02 PM (ry6W6)

Hmmmm. When is Koskinen getting fired?

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 09, 2017 02:04 PM (PY9jH)

231 I've updated to include the additional information you've all put me.

Posted by: Cornelius at February 09, 2017 02:04 PM (8rNrN)

232 Like the EPA getting/funding activist groups to sue them into making a rule they want to do anyways but would be too controversial unless it appears they are forced. I see the WA - 9th circus and perhaps SCOTUS when it gets there EO case the same way. It's a setup to get what they can't normally get.

Posted by: geoffb5 at February 09, 2017 02:04 PM (d3wbb)

233 We will have to add another amendment to clarify/amend the birthright citizenship given in the 14th. Trying to argue alone that the 14th does not provide would be an uphill battle.

I don't think it would be as difficult to get 2/3 of the states to ratify.

Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at February 09, 2017 02:04 PM (Z9mio)

234 I would expect prices of strawberries and blue berries and french fries to go up if this keeps up.
Posted by: Kindltot at February 09, 2017 02:02 PM (ry6W6)

===================

Well, we can pay the costs through welfare benefits claimed by illegals via taxes, which we have no control over, or through a voluntary transaction between two parties.

Hmm, tough decision.

Posted by: Blake at February 09, 2017 02:04 PM (qC1Sy)

235 Actually, during debate on the 14th, many members of Congress made it clear that they were stating a broader right that recoursed to the Common Law practice.
Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:01 PM (OzJeO)

Could be. But legislative debates don't matter, only the text of the law matters. And is it completely irrelevant that for the first 30 years the 14th amendment was in effect it was never read to mean the child of two aliens was a US citizen?

A plain reading of the text, and an understanding of what it meant when it was passed makes it pretty hard to argue that "and under the jurisdiction thereof" doesn't mean exactly that.

Here's what the US AG had to say in 1873, "The word 'jurisdiction' must be understood to mean absolute and complete jurisdiction, such as the United States had over its citizens before the adoption of this amendment. Aliens, among whom are persons born here and naturalized abroad, dwelling or being in this country, are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States only to a limited extent. Political and military rights and duties do not pertain to them."

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 09, 2017 02:05 PM (wmaTe)

236 If these people put half as much effort into affecting change in Mexico that they put into breaking our laws...

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 02:05 PM (WQ9DL)

237 >>"Basically we are Americans," he said. "This is our country. We were brought here when we were teens.

Technically, legally, you are not.

Posted by: Lizzy at February 09, 2017 02:05 PM (NOIQH)

238 "Garcia de Rayos' husband does not have legal status and did not want to be identified. "Basically we are Americans," he said. "This is our country. We were brought here when we were teens."

---------

Sovereignty be damned, they have decided they own what they steal.
Posted by: Decaf

They haven't really thought that game through.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 02:05 PM (2w7OO)

239 I mean, couldn't an army of 20-35 Million take Mexico back from their oppressors?

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 02:05 PM (WQ9DL)

240 "Basically we are Americans," he said. "This is our country. We were brought here when we were teens.

Technically, legally, you are not.

Figuratively, not literally.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 02:05 PM (2w7OO)

241 Actually, during debate on the 14th, many members of Congress made it clear that they were stating a broader right that recoursed to the Common Law practice.
Posted by: The Political Hat
___________

Yea, I'm sure there were serious discussions among lawmakers about how this would be a good way for people to be here in violation of our laws and have a kid and make American citizens.

Or it was about what to do with the slave population that had just been freed a few years ago.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (m6M2c)

242 So from 1789-1898, you weren't guaranteed citizenship by simply being born here.

In that time period, things were a lot more loose and being a citizen was mostly just "well I live here now" and not vows and such very often. If someone immigrated here, took a train to Arizona Territory, and set up a blacksmith shop, well now he's the town blacksmith and an American. Things started to tighten up in the late 1800s with the telegraph and train lines, and as land was settled.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (39g3+)

243 Actually, blah blah blah blah blah.
Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:01 PM (OzJeO)

This is why we need to stop letting lawyers make and interpret law.

Posted by: BurtTC at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (TOk1P)

244 I seem to recall about a year ago that police busted up some hotels in CA that specialized in hosting Chines citizens who would come to America to give birth so that their baby could be an anchor to get the rest of the Chinese family in, particularly the grandparents who then "retire" to the US to suck up all of the entitlements.

Foreigners have been gaming the birthright citizenship in so many ways, for so long, it needs to end.
Posted by: Lizzy at February 09, 2017 01:54 PM (NOIQH)

Fun fact...

The University of California, Irvine (UCI for short) is known as the University of Chinese Immigrants. The Chinese quietly invaded the city of Irvine and quietly run things...silly people think the Irvine family still has sway.

A few years ago there was a push to have free breakfast and lunch served to the illegal alien children in the elementary schools in Irvine; the Chinese shut that shit down.

By the way, South Coast Plaza (huge mall in Costa Mesa) goes all out every year to celebrate the Chinese New Year. During the celebration, the mall basically becomes occupied with nothing but Chinese people. I avoid that mall during that time.

Posted by: I Be That Chick at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (S/qwI)

245 [i[230 The IRS doesn't care, as long as the taxes are paid.

Posted by: Kindltot at February 09, 2017 02:02 PM (ry6W6)

Hmmmm. When is Koskinen getting fired?

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 09, 2017 02:04 PM (PY9jH)

#TwoWeeks?

Posted by: filbert at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (K4zH2)

246 gee, I'm sure that if I committed documentation fraud the authorities would be very understanding and I'd get a slap on the wrist and a sternly worded reprimand-NOT!

Posted by: Very Irredeemably Undude at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (2X7pN)

247 Does the US still honor dual citizenship?
If so, why?

Posted by: navybrat at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (w7KSn)

248 Anybody seen the commercials recruiting for ICE and the Border patrol?

Posted by: tu3031 at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (qJhUV)

249 219
>>We could invade Mexico again and keep it this time. That would fix some of the problemo.

Yeah. We need every scumbag in Mexico City as a US Resident.
Posted by: garrett

And fifty more Democrat senators.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at February 09, 2017 02:02 PM (IqV8l)

====================

Who said anything about making Mexico a state?

Make them territories and demand new constitutions from each Mexican state to govern them. When they're not sufficiently American, Congress slaps it down and demands a new one with instructions on how to fix it.

Until then, military governor.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (vur0q)

250 They're going to highlight the supposed tearjerk cases

Posted by: jihadi at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (I64i9)

251 She came to the US at age 14, now she's 36 and in all of that time she didn't bother to get her status squared away?

No sympathy here.

Posted by: Fritz at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (2Mnv1)

252 I don't think it would be as difficult to get 2/3 of the states to ratify.
Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at February 09, 2017 02:04 PM (Z9mio)

amendment requires 3/4 of the states

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (wmaTe)

253 Nobody in the mainstream media will report that she had engaged in felony identity theft.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 09, 2017 02:07 PM (fDdVG)

254
...what time does the Donkey Show start?
_________________________________

As soon as I get there....

*hic*

Posted by: Hillary Clinton at February 09, 2017 02:07 PM (HSmrB)

255 A real poncho, or a Sears poncho?
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 09, 2017 02:02 PM (WDdjT)

Get one from Villa's

Posted by: Jos� Doroteo Arango Arambula at February 09, 2017 02:07 PM (ry6W6)

256 The left: "You racist asshats! Mexico is a wonderful country with beautiful scenery, great biodiversity and a rich, deep culture. Filled with people who have warm hearts and strong family values."
...................

Maybe we should rename deportation to "Permanent Vacation"?

Posted by: wth at February 09, 2017 02:07 PM (HgMAr)

257 The 14th Amendment didn't make American Indians American citizens that was done by an act of congress many years later.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 01:57 PM (+lv+r)

Indians were explicitly mentioned, because they were not fully under United States jurisdiction.

Unless actual jurisdiction it taken away (as by an occupying army) or voluntarily limited (as with an Ambassador and Embassy), that United States jurisdiction fully applies.

It's really that simple.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:07 PM (OzJeO)

258 @229

Congress has plenary authority over immigration and naturalization they could clarify it and pass laws defining how the 14th ammendmant is to be interpreted.

In essence define their jurisdiction.

What's the court going to say we reject how you've defined your jurisdiction?

Madness!!!

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 02:08 PM (+lv+r)

259 Being born in America makes you American, that's how its always been.
The fact that people break the law to take advantage of that means we
need to enforce the law and protect our borders better. With proper
immigration enforcement, proper protection of the border, ending welfare
for non-citzens, hammering businesses that hire illegals etc, that
wouldn't be a significant issue any longer.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 01:50 PM (39g3+)

I think it would still be a significant issue. There are more than a few hospitals who deliberately market their maternity wards to birth tourism, with big marketing campaigns in foreign countries, etc.. Their clients fly in as tourists, have the baby and *presto* instant citizen and the start of a new chain migration.

Posted by: cool breeze at February 09, 2017 02:08 PM (StZrq)

260 We could invade Mexico again and keep it this time. That would fix some of the problemo.

Could we start with Baja? Love the beaches. Baby steps.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 09, 2017 02:08 PM (PY9jH)

261 Spicer being interrogated over the AZ deportation now; ICE matter, FYNQ.
Next Question Goresuch-Blumenthal (alleged) conversation. Goresuch didn't comment on any current case. FYNQ.

Posted by: andycanuck at February 09, 2017 02:08 PM (nlbfN)

262 Here is an Idea.

A Family Reunification Fund.

Purpose: To pay the moving expenses for illegal immigrants and any other refugee or immigrant that wants to return home. It should also be authorized to pay for relocation of any minor US Citizen children. Minors are not required to renounce US Citizenship, but may do so if required by the Naturalization Laws of the destination country. Qualifications include signing documents renouncing all claims and citizenship claims for all adults against the US, forever.

Fund to pay for Business Class transportation of all members plus up to 5,000 pounds of personal goods per family and 500 punds per person. Alternatively, a flat $1,000 per person payment per person can be offered, irrespective of expenses.

Again, only if they sign documents renouncing all claims and citizenship claims against the US, its States, Counties, Cities, (etc.) f orever.

Posted by: rd at February 09, 2017 02:08 PM (iT57s)

263 The protesters have not engaged in mass terminal hunger strikes. Zod finds their level of commitment puny and unimpressive.

Posted by: General Zod at February 09, 2017 02:08 PM (Bdeb0)

264 I mean, couldn't an army of 20-35 Million take Mexico back from their oppressors?

Sure, and that's why they are here rather than in Mexico. Because that's how corrupt governments and drug kingpins stay in power: by sending the pressure that would otherwise depose them over the border to the USA.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:08 PM (39g3+)

265 Hasta la vista, baybee.

Posted by: El Terminatador at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (DMUuz)

266 Unless actual jurisdiction it taken away (as by an
occupying army)

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:07 PM (OzJeO)

Uh....what about much of Southern California?

La Raza!

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (rF0hx)

267 If the U.S. law applies
***
And again, by their mere presence it does not.

Posted by: 18-1 at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (aZq03)

268 "Garcia de Rayos' husband does not have legal status and did not want to be identified. "Basically we are Americans," he said. "This is our country. We were brought here when we were teens."

I stole this car a while ago. Basically it's mine.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (493sH)

269 >>Maybe we should rename deportation to "Permanent Vacation"?

Heh.

Maybe we should accuse these illegal immigrants who have been here so long they believe they are "basically" Americans as "cultural appropriators"?

Posted by: Lizzy at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (NOIQH)

270 How do you challenge a constitutional amendment?

I think you can challenge interpretations of the amendment, but unless you're talking about a constitutional amendment that actually changes it, you're not actually challenging it itself.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison
_____________

Isn't it obvious I'm talking about whether someone born here to illegal immigrants gets instant American citizenship for the child? It's never been adjudicated.

I'm not challenging whether American slaves had birthright citizenship.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (m6M2c)

271 51 Like I said, this feels an awful lot like what lawyers call a "test-case," where an agitation group casts its defendant for a morality play they want to stage.

The administration needs to find an illegal alien rapist or gang banger and make that person the face of the soon-to-be-deported.

---

That, and order a press conference where the deep-state paper pusher who organized the theatrics gets to be the face of the prosecuting federal gov't. Not all of the wailers and teeth-gnashers are in on the plan. (oh, and what do you know, his home address got leaked! Sad!)

Posted by: Slo-Pitch Whiffer at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (zke7T)

272 "Basically we are Americans," he said. "This is our country. We were brought here when we were teens."

Basically I'm a non-porn watching American. Except when I'm watching porn. According to the stats of PornTube, their average viewer watches for seven minutes out of the 1,440 minutes in the day. So basically, they're bankrupt, with no audience.

His 'Basically' is full of shit.

Posted by: E Pluribus Juan at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (ZFUt7)

273 >>> "Basically we are Americans," he said. "This is our country. We were brought here when we were teens.

Well if THAT's all it takes, I declare myself Peruvian! Also Canadian and English and Australian and Swiss, just to round things out.

Posted by: LizLem at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (hvf9s)

274 Ah, the mostly peaceful protests again. Liberals are fucking illiterate.

Posted by: Very Irredeemably Undude at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (2X7pN)

275 Don't challenge the 14th. Disregard the Brennan footnote and the bureaucratic rules that flowed from its less than dicta substance.

Posted by: geoffb5 at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (d3wbb)

276 This is a perfect example of how Illegal immigration leads to multiple other crimes.

EVERY illegal immigrant has broken multiple laws... including felonies.

Because its still a felony to knowingly Aid and Abet an illegal alien to stay in the US... and this law covers OTHER illegal Aliens...

So, if you are both illegals and you help your girlfriend stay by paying her rent, or bills? You ARE committing a Felony.

Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (qf6WZ)

277 In that time period, things were a lot more loose and being a citizen was mostly just "well I live here now" and not vows and such very often. If someone immigrated here, took a train to Arizona Territory, and set up a blacksmith shop, well now he's the town blacksmith and an American. Things started to tighten up in the late 1800s with the telegraph and train lines, and as land was settled.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (39g3+)

You needed to be a citizen to vote, and other than coming here illegally, you needed to get an entry visa, there were quote systems, and you needed to prove to an immigrant officer that you would bring value to the country and be self sufficient. You also needed to go through a physical exam upon getting here, etc.

In many ways it was stricter in the 1800s then it is now.

I mean, legally.

Yes, it was arguably easier to illegally do all of that back then since it was easier to fake papers and harder to verify who you were before photo IDs, but, uh... no, it was never as easy as just showing up and getting on a train.

At least not legally.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (wmaTe)

278 My sense is that the people who come here legally
are for the most part very ticked off by illegals who garner the system
and get to stay scot free.
-------------------------
Perhaps some are ticked off. A large percent of legal immigrants entered via family "reunification" (roughly 3/4 of immigrant visas). I would wager a bigly percent of them are opposed to any vigorous enforcement of the immigration laws.

Posted by: RioBravo at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (SsblQ)

279 The main birthright citizenship argument I've heard is that without it, you end up with an underclass of unassimilatable foreigners. Like in Europe, where they imported Turks and other guest workers, who ended up staying and having kids. Those kids aren't even potentially German or whatever, and may not have real ties to their parents' country.

I'm sure that's fixable, but messing with things willy-nilly leads to other headaches.

Crack down on the illegals and other criminals (and the law-breaking employers), and reform the guest worker programs, and then let's see. We have enough on our plate.

Posted by: Lance McCormick at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (3FppC)

280 So yeah ya' know that catapult thingy that Monty Python had in one of his movies? the one with
'I'm not dead yet!'

Yeah well....

PULL!

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (BB1en)

281 I stole this car a while ago. Basically it's mine.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (493sH)

You're in my basement, chained to a post. Basically you're mine.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (rF0hx)

282 271 --- oops: "That, OR ..."

Posted by: Slo-Pitch Whiffer at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (zke7T)

283 "My parents squatted in this mansion when I was a teen. Therefore, this mansion is mine."

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (PY9jH)

284 >>Sure, and that's why they are here rather than in Mexico. Because that's how corrupt governments and drug kingpins stay in power: by sending the pressure that would otherwise depose them over the border to the USA.

Let's give them Pikes, Axes and Swords and march them back over the border.

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 02:11 PM (WQ9DL)

285 270 Isn't it obvious I'm talking about whether someone born here to illegal immigrants gets instant American citizenship for the child? It's never been adjudicated.

I'm not challenging whether American slaves had birthright citizenship.
Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (m6M2c)

==================

I guess I was just being a stickler about the phrase "the 14th Amendment needs to be challenged".

You didn't originate it, but I was lazy and didn't want to go back to find the original poster, and you also seemed to take up the idea yourself.

That's all.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:11 PM (vur0q)

286 260 We could invade Mexico again and keep it this time. That would fix some of the problemo.

Could we start with Baja? Love the beaches. Baby steps.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 09, 2017 02:08 PM (PY9jH)

Baja? I thought we could offer it to Israel as a second homeland? Imagine what it would like in 20 years?

Posted by: rd at February 09, 2017 02:11 PM (iT57s)

287 Here is an Idea.

A Family Reunification Fund.

Posted by: rd

__________

I have thought for a while paying these people off to deport and renounce any future application for immigration would be the deal of the century for the American taxpayer.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:11 PM (m6M2c)

288 You're in my basement, chained to a post. Basically you're mine.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (rF0hx)

In many ways the story of Harry Reid

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 09, 2017 02:11 PM (493sH)

289 Maybe we should rename deportation to "Permanent Vacation"?
-------------
Heh.

Maybe we should accuse these illegal immigrants who have been here so long they believe they are "basically" Americans as "cultural appropriators"?

Posted by: Lizzy at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (NOIQH)

I believe we should get rid of this notion of illegal deportation.

I say we send them back, and we can call them undocumented deportees.

Problem solved.

Posted by: BurtTC at February 09, 2017 02:11 PM (TOk1P)

290 They're going to highlight the supposed tearjerk cases

Of course, that's all they ran for a week straight about the immigration suspension. There were no immigrants anywhere except sick children strangely unable to find any other nation's medical care, sad kids kept from their parents, and couples longing to be reunited trying to immigrate into the USA.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:12 PM (39g3+)

291 ID theft.

Fuck her.

Posted by: eleven at February 09, 2017 02:12 PM (qUNWi)

292 I suspect damned near ALL of the illegals working in the US gave bogus social security numbers to their bosses.

If the number was already issued, it's identity theft. This also means the Social Security Administration knows the reported address of all working illegals.

They can all be tracked down and herded back home.

Posted by: Kristophr at February 09, 2017 02:12 PM (1f2c5)

293 281 I stole this car a while ago. Basically it's mine.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (493sH)

You're in my basement, chained to a post. Basically you're mine.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (rF0hx)

Hilarious you guyz!

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at February 09, 2017 02:12 PM (BB1en)

294 The woman arrested is a long-time illegal with a husband and two (legal) children. But she has an arrest record -- a fairly minor thing.

++++

My reading: if the husband was legal, they would have said the husband was legal. Since they didn't, he's an illegal. So, two illegals have 2 kids here in the US, and under the disputed reading of the 14th, the anchor babies are deemed legal.

The whole family should be shipped back to Mexico.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at February 09, 2017 02:13 PM (R+30W)

295 Baja? I thought we could offer it to Israel as a second homeland? Imagine what it would like in 20 years?

Posted by: rd at February 09, 2017 02:11 PM (iT57s)
--------------------------
Palestine with kosher tacos?

Posted by: RioBravo at February 09, 2017 02:13 PM (SsblQ)

296 I swiped this candy bar, like ten minutes ago, so basically, it's mine.

Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 02:13 PM (3Liv/)

297 294 The whole family should be shipped back to Mexico.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at February 09, 2017 02:13 PM (R+30W)

====================

I mean, you don't want to break up the family, do you?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:13 PM (vur0q)

298 And those trains all originated in the East and you got to them through a (bottle-necked) port of entry.

Posted by: andycanuck at February 09, 2017 02:13 PM (nlbfN)

299 Actually, during debate on the 14th, many members of Congress made
it clear that they were stating a broader right that recoursed to the
Common Law practice.
---
And we reject that.

What's your point?
Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 02:03 PM (3Liv/)

That the intent was directed at ex-slaves, but not limited thereto.

Yea, I'm sure there were serious discussions among lawmakers about how this would be a good way for people to be here in violation of our laws and have a kid and make American citizens.

Or it was about what to do with the slave population that had just been freed a few years ago.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (m6M2c)

Non-ex-slave and non-"Negro" examples were discussed during the dabate.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:13 PM (OzJeO)

300 I would expect prices of strawberries and blue berries and french fries to go up if this keeps up.
Posted by: Kindltot at February 09, 2017 02:02 PM (ry6W6)

NPR's marketplace did an interview with the small business owners of a pie shop in LA, they expressed the same concerns about produce prices.
But you have to square that circle with the same groups that want mass amnesty calling for Minimum wage increases.

As The Great Milton pointed out: illegal immigration only benefits both parties (the worker and the employer) because it's illegal.
(Otherwise you could fill the gap with a legal temporary guest worker program.

Posted by: tsrlbke PhD(c), rogue bioethicist at February 09, 2017 02:14 PM (dzmBR)

301 I'm in ur country, stealin' ur ID's.

Posted by: Illegal Kitteh at February 09, 2017 02:14 PM (PY9jH)

302 If you are here illegally but working "legally" you most probably are guilty of identity theft or at least fraud.

Posted by: Lost My Cookies at February 09, 2017 02:14 PM (nMmK1)

303 I stole this car a while ago. Basically it's mine.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (493sH)

You're in my basement, chained to a post. Basically you're mine.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (rF0hx)

Hilarious you guyz!
Posted by: Cannibal Bob

Hilarious? BS. That's the law according to the illegals.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 02:14 PM (2w7OO)

304 Posted by: rd at February 09, 2017 02:08 PM (iT57s)

Dual Citizenship was made legal in the US in 1965 by the Supreme Court... in a case of Judicial Overreach...

They blatantly legislated from the bench...

1st thing is to get rid of dual citizenship... you are either a US Citizen, or something else... not both.

Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 02:14 PM (qf6WZ)

305 Spicer came pretty close to saying, "What are you? An idiot?" when somebody asked him why Trump was/wasn't Tweeting about something.

Posted by: Geronimo Stilton at February 09, 2017 02:14 PM (OVUYQ)

306 I have thought for a while paying these people off to deport and renounce any future application for immigration would be the deal of the century for the American taxpayer.

Until they come back.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:14 PM (39g3+)

307
If the Republicans were smart, they would being out the victim of the identity theft and let him talk about how much this poor innocent illegal alien screwed up his life and credit and finances.

I knew a guy this happen to,state came after him for five years of back child support for a kid that wasn't his and a woman he had never met.The state garnished his wages and it took him over a year and $12,000 in lawyers fees to straighten it out and the state never refunded the money it had garnished.

Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at February 09, 2017 02:14 PM (lKyWE)

308 Isn't it obvious I'm talking about whether someone born here to illegal immigrants gets instant American citizenship for the child? It's never been adjudicated.

I'm not challenging whether American slaves had birthright citizenship.
Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (m6M2c)

==================

I guess I was just being a stickler about the phrase "the 14th Amendment needs to be challenged".

You didn't originate it, but I was lazy and didn't want to go back to find the original poster, and you also seemed to take up the idea yourself.

That's all.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison

___________

You seem to be a "stickler" for every post I make

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:14 PM (m6M2c)

309 #294 Someone above quoted a news report that the husband is, indeed, illegal as well.

Posted by: andycanuck at February 09, 2017 02:14 PM (nlbfN)

310 these Media Morons just don't don't get it !

hahahaha

Posted by: EVLINC! at February 09, 2017 02:15 PM (y3aQB)

311 If we had listened to Bill Kristol, Hillary would have been president and instead of deporting this illegal, the Feds would be tracking down her extended family in Mexico to bring here and replace lazy white people like me.

Posted by: Ripley at February 09, 2017 02:15 PM (1BQGO)

312 Horchata Futures are Down!

Posted by: InTrade Guy at February 09, 2017 02:15 PM (WQ9DL)

313 Basically I stole your identity. It's mine now.

Posted by: E Pluribus Juan at February 09, 2017 02:15 PM (ZFUt7)

314 I post comments on this blog, so basically, it's mine.

Posted by: Dirty Randy at February 09, 2017 02:15 PM (jjaLl)

315 I'm still not tired of winning.

More Trump please!!!

Posted by: SchlongStrong at February 09, 2017 02:15 PM (rhsOb)

316 Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:09 PM (m6M2c)

Citizenship for slaves? Isn't that moot in 2017?

Posted by: rd at February 09, 2017 02:15 PM (iT57s)

317 Spicer came pretty close to saying, "What are you? An idiot?" when somebody asked him why Trump was/wasn't Tweeting about something.

Posted by: Geronimo Stilton at February 09, 2017 02:14 PM (OVUYQ)

Was that the douche with the beard and red tie?

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 09, 2017 02:15 PM (493sH)

318 These daily pressers are a joke. Reporter was just badgering Spicer as to why Trump didn't tweet about the attack on the mosque in Canada. Spicer tells him that he opened his presser the other day with Trump's comments about the attack. Reporter says well yea but why didn't he tweet about it?

What an idiot.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 09, 2017 02:15 PM (/tuJf)

319 I swiped this candy bar, like ten minutes ago, so basically, it's mine.

Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 02:13 PM (3Liv/)
............

No, no. It's mine.

Posted by: Methos' stomach at February 09, 2017 02:15 PM (HgMAr)

320
You're in my basement, chained to a post. Basically you're mine.
___
That's my line

Posted by: Jeffrey Epstein at February 09, 2017 02:15 PM (aZq03)

321 110--- This really annoys me. I was an immigrant and did everything by the book. All the documentation, waited patiently, paid all the fees, waited some more, did all the medicals, never took welfare, pay my taxes, try to be the best citizen I can. And then you have illegals who do shit like this and expect to get sympathy!
Posted by: IC at February 09, 2017 01:45 PM (a0IVu)
-------------------------------------
Tell me about it.
It's a kick in the teeth to LEGAL immigrants.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 09, 2017 02:15 PM (Nox3c)

322 308 You seem to be a "stickler" for every post I make
Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:14 PM (m6M2c)

===================

I hardly ever notice who I'm responding to.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:16 PM (vur0q)

323 My parents squatted in this mansion when I was a teen. Therefore, this mansion is mine.

Not a lawyer, but I think that's actually correct; if you live there long enough, the mansion's all yours.

Posted by: Geronimo Stilton at February 09, 2017 02:16 PM (OVUYQ)

324 290 They're going to highlight the supposed tearjerk cases

The history of LEGAL immigration to this country is rife with tearjerk cases. Unfortunately the average LIV does not know this due to having lived in an alphabet network #fakenews cocoon.

The inflow-outflow from any nation to another was never supposed to be easy. Maybe we should start highlighting the tearjerk cases of the Central Americans who are abused by Mexican immigration authorities.

Posted by: kallisto at February 09, 2017 02:16 PM (nNdYv)

325 It cost me a lot of lost earnings to come here legally, having proposed marriage to a US native (Texan). Dam' straight illegal immigration pisses me off.

Posted by: Unsure if deplorable, officially styled moron at February 09, 2017 02:16 PM (9MlEz)

326 >> I swiped this candy bar, like ten minutes ago, so basically, it's mine.

That's My Twix!

Posted by: Geroge Costanza at February 09, 2017 02:16 PM (WQ9DL)

327 You're in my basement, chained to a post. Basically you're mine.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (rF0hx)

Cut. Jib. Newsletter?

Posted by: Jame Gumb at February 09, 2017 02:16 PM (XoldI)

328 Horhata, kosher tacos...crap now I'm hungry.

*runs away to get lunch*

Posted by: LizLem at February 09, 2017 02:16 PM (hvf9s)

329 I seem to recall about a year ago that police busted up some hotels in CA that specialized in hosting Chines citizens who would come to America to give birth so that their baby could be an anchor to get the rest of the Chinese family in, particularly the grandparents who then "retire" to the US to suck up all of the entitlements.

Foreigners have been gaming the birthright citizenship in so many ways, for so long, it needs to end.
Posted by: Lizzy

More than hotels, chinese are buying up homes in LA county to set up birthing clinics. The 'customers' schedule their expected date, fly over with $10k -$15k in pre-paid credit cards, have a kid at the clinic, and fly home.

Any one wonder if entire industries and governments in the US will be thoroughly riddled with PRC agents in 25 years?

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 09, 2017 02:16 PM (4YGWz)

330 Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:13 PM (OzJeO)

So, you would agree that the 14th amendment needs to be repealed.

Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 02:16 PM (3Liv/)

331 Deported her under budget AND AHEAD OF SCHEDULE!!!

Posted by: SchlongStrong at February 09, 2017 02:16 PM (rhsOb)

332 In the Americas, birthright citizenship is almost universal. For the rest of the world, it is rare.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_tourism

So if a US woman goes to Mexico (legally or not) and gives birth there, the baby has both Mexican and US citizenship.

But Family Court law in the US favors keeping the children with the mother/parents if at all possible, sometimes even to the detriment of the children.

So the commonsense answer is to deport the illegal parent(s) and their children, but the anchor children have the right to come back into the US legally once they turn 18, no questions asked.

And if they have a legal relative in the US prior to them being 18, and the now deported parent(s) grant that person legal guardianship of the children, they can also come back.

Posted by: GnuBreed at February 09, 2017 02:17 PM (xpfRn)

333 318:What an idiot.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 09, 2017 02:15 PM (/tuJf)
I thought they were saying he tweets too much? Now its why did he not tweet about something?

Posted by: IC at February 09, 2017 02:17 PM (a0IVu)

334 If the Republicans were smart, they would being out the victim of the identity theft and let him talk about how much this poor innocent illegal alien screwed up his life and credit and finances.

I knew a guy this happen to,state came after him for five years of back child support for a kid that wasn't his and a woman he had never met.The state garnished his wages and it took him over a year and $12,000 in lawyers fees to straighten it out and the state never refunded the money it had garnished.
Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic
_______

i've been the victim of identity theft years ago, and I'm still working through it with the IRS.

Someone completed a tax return with my info to get a quick refund check

Absolute nightmare, and if there are tens of millions of illegals committing ID theft, there has to be a lot of people feeling the pain also.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:17 PM (m6M2c)

335 >>You're in my basement, chained to a post. Basically you're mine.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (rF0hx)

I'm gonna go ahead and call it for the Jooo Hating Cob.

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 02:17 PM (WQ9DL)

336 Horchata, sigh. Sign I need food.

Posted by: LizLem at February 09, 2017 02:17 PM (hvf9s)

337
Hilarious? BS. That's the law according to the illegals.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 02:14 PM (2w7OO)

I know rick, I live in Phoenix. It was the presentation. Come on, the basement thing was funny.

*gathers duct tape, chloroform....*

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at February 09, 2017 02:17 PM (BB1en)

338 These daily pressers are a joke. Reporter was just badgering Spicer as to why Trump didn't tweet about the attack on the mosque in Canada.
***
He should have said he'd get to it after he finished talking about all the terror attacks in the US that the Fake News Media hasn't focused on, starting with the DC Muslim Snipers.

Posted by: 18-1 at February 09, 2017 02:17 PM (aZq03)

339 Do you want to pay ten dollars for a head of lettuce?

Posted by: Juan McCain at February 09, 2017 02:17 PM (IqV8l)

340 I post comments on this blog, so basically, it's mine.

Posted by: Dirty Randy

Basically, it's JJ's and CBD's with an occasional late afternoon guest host.

I kid.

Posted by: E Pluribus Juan at February 09, 2017 02:18 PM (ZFUt7)

341 >>I thought they were saying he tweets too much? Now its why did he not tweet about something?

Reporter was implying that if Trump really thought the attack was important he would have tweeted about it because he tweets about less important things.

And the media wonders why Trump calls them fake news.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 09, 2017 02:18 PM (/tuJf)

342 I think when they get a really stupid question, the press secretary should just stare at the reporter for an uncomfortable length of time with an "are you kidding me?" look, then pick another reporter for a question.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:18 PM (39g3+)

343 Non-ex-slave and non-"Negro" examples were discussed during the dabate.
Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:13 PM (OzJeO)

Who are you, Elena Kagan?

Legislative debate and legislative history are irrelevant. This was one of Scalias biggest pet peeves. Yes, in a debate with thousands and thousands of people in the US Senate, House of Representatives, and every state's Houses over several months, I'm sure lots of things were brought up.

It's completely irrelevant.

The only thing to "argue" over is what "... and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means, and the most persuasive argument (in my humble opinion) is that for the first 2 generations the 14th existed it was generally understood to mean exactly that -- people who were under US jurisdiction. Namely US citizens and former slaves.

In the late 1800s, during the progressive era, the court began just ignoring that part "...and.." part and said "meaningless."

It's a pretty debatable topic, it's nowhere near as settled as you're asking.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 09, 2017 02:18 PM (wmaTe)

344 >>>4 So she's an illegal alien, married to a US Citizen and has two US born babies?
Posted by: CrotchetyOldJarhead at February 09, 2017 01:26 PM (i0ykY)

___________

No, her husband is illegal too. They say so later in the article. I'm sure the first part pretending he was a citizen was a harmless honest fake news mistake (it wasn't).

Posted by: SchlongStrong at February 09, 2017 02:18 PM (rhsOb)

345 Baja? I thought we could offer it to Israel as a second homeland? Imagine what it would like in 20 years?
Posted by: rd at February 09, 2017 02:11 PM (iT57s)

Baja California is three times the size of Israel.

omergerd. What would they do with all that space?

Posted by: Kindltot at February 09, 2017 02:19 PM (ry6W6)

346 Re: My heart is hardened
***
I don't think that is what you meant, Nacly. You do have a soft spot in your heart, but is isn't for lawbreakers, it is for *law-abiding* Americans. Every time an illegal gets to stay here without consequence, it does hurt our nation. Just this one example alone shows that our social security system, (which I have paid into my entire adult life and will receive nothing when I retire in a couple of decades b/c it will be bankrupt), was compromised.

And that's not even accounting for the identity theft of a real American...many of us know the cost of that particular societal evil.

So I don't think your heart is hardened at all. You just see the problem clearly and aren't led down the rosy liberal path of "this land is your land" crap.

Posted by: squeakywheel at February 09, 2017 02:19 PM (f31Us)

347 Do you want to pay ten dollars for a head of lettuce

Not for trash iceberg.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 02:19 PM (2w7OO)

348 The main birthright citizenship argument I've heard is that without it, you end up with an underclass of unassimilatable foreigners.

Posted by: Lance McCormick at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (3FppC)

Feel free to come to Central Valley California... where you will now see an entire alternative culture.

You can't get a job around here unless you are bilingual.

They are not assimilating... because they don't have to, as they are the majority.

Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 02:19 PM (qf6WZ)

349 At a certain point, a nation has to choose to become a nation. Everywhere on earth was, at one point or another, a melting pot. That's what happens when enough people gather in one place - a gathering that builds until it becomes a country, etc. America was founded as such... but that ship sailed a loooooong while back. We are also loooooong past the point where we have to decide to regard this country as a nation rather than just a melting pot. Nations have borders, and they damn well have consequences for illegally crossing those borders.

I think most of us here agree that the left doesn't care one way or the other about borders. They just want the lowest class/caste possible to come in, know who gives out the benefits, and vote Democrat in perpetuity. To care about borders is to care about the nation, and the Democrats are long past that. They couldn't give less of a shit if they tried. They're after that multi-trillion dollar annual tax revenue that flows into the treasure and FUCK AND DIE RACIST if you get in their way.

They can sell the messiah angle via people like Obama and Clinton to the dumber members of their flock, but plain greed is what drives them. Obtaining, and retaining the associated power to control the money flow is all they care about.

It's good to see that ICE has the ability to do their job for the first time since Obama took over. It's been far too long, and it's a good sign that deportations are going to ramp up in the near and long term. Hopefully, they'll be able to bounce so many illegals out of the country that by the time the Trump/Pence era closes and another Democrat claims the White House, they won't be able to get everyone back even if they throw open the doors again.

Posted by: sans_sheriff at February 09, 2017 02:19 PM (tXPWk)

350 252 I don't think it would be as difficult to get 2/3 of the states to ratify.
Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at February 09, 2017 02:04 PM (Z9mio)

amendment requires 3/4 of the states
Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 09, 2017 02:06 PM (wmaTe)

I blame it on auto correct.

Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at February 09, 2017 02:19 PM (Z9mio)

351 340 Basically, it's JJ's and CBD's with an occasional late afternoon guest host.

I kid.
Posted by: E Pluribus Juan at February 09, 2017 02:18 PM (ZFUt7)

====================

Who is this Ace person?

I need a podcast to know that he's alive for proof of life.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:19 PM (vur0q)

352 338 These daily pressers are a joke. Reporter was just badgering Spicer as to why Trump didn't tweet about the attack on the mosque in Canada.

Something strange about that anyway... No mention of it. It just seemed to disappear...

Posted by: deplorable donna at February 09, 2017 02:19 PM (O2RFr)

353 Was that the douche with the beard and red tie?
====

Yep, that's him.

Posted by: Geronimo Stilton at February 09, 2017 02:19 PM (OVUYQ)

354 There are times I wish Laura Ingraham was press sec. She'd swat the media weasels down so fast, and enjoy every minute of it.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 09, 2017 02:19 PM (PY9jH)

355 342 I think when they get a really stupid question, the press secretary should just stare at the reporter for an uncomfortable length of time with an "are you kidding me?" look, then pick another reporter for a question.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:18 PM (39g3+)

Yes. This. Its all gotcha anyway.

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at February 09, 2017 02:20 PM (BB1en)

356 U.S. citizenship to the child of an illegal is a problematic incentive.

Posted by: BourbonChicken at February 09, 2017 02:20 PM (VdICR)

357 I don't think it would be as difficult to get 2/3 of the states to ratify.
___
What is 2/3s of 57 again?

Posted by: Barack Obama at February 09, 2017 02:20 PM (aZq03)

358 But Mr. President, what about your tweeeeeeeeets?!?!?

Posted by: JackStraw at February 09, 2017 02:20 PM (/tuJf)

359 So, you would agree that the 14th amendment needs to be repealed.

I think it needs to be substantially reworded. Its redundant to the 9th and 10th amendments, but a lot of the constitution is redundant but has to be to hammer certain concepts into stubborn minds.

Not that the document has any purpose except as a bludgeon to harm America any longer. Nobody really heeds it.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:20 PM (39g3+)

360 I think when they get a really stupid question, the press secretary should just stare at the reporter for an uncomfortable length of time with an "are you kidding me?" look, then pick another reporter for a question.

Silence CAN be deafening.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 02:21 PM (2w7OO)

361 More than hotels, chinese are buying up homes in LA county to set up
birthing clinics. The 'customers' schedule their expected date, fly over
with $10k -$15k in pre-paid credit cards, have a kid at the clinic, and
fly home.
---
How hard would it be for the State Department to simply not issue travel visas to pregnant women?

Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 02:21 PM (3Liv/)

362 You know what happens if we lose all the illegal labor that's keeping some prices artificially low because the cost of the labor is being kept artificially low? Some prices rise. You know what else rises? The employment rate in this country. You know what drops? All the crap that the devil creates because of idle hands.

Posted by: SFGoth at February 09, 2017 02:21 PM (dZ756)

363 339 Do you want to pay ten dollars for a head of lettuce?

Hmmm. It doesn't have E Coli from your poop in the field on it, right?

Posted by: Roy at February 09, 2017 02:21 PM (VndSC)

364 U.S. citizenship to the child of an illegal is a problematic incentive.

But it would be significantly less so, if the parents and kid could still be deported, allowing the citizen child to come back when they are 18, alone. That would remove most of the incentive because they would no longer be "anchor" babies.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:21 PM (39g3+)

365 How hard would it be for the State Department to simply not issue travel visas to pregnant women?
___
OMERGAWHD! Like why do you have womenz?

Posted by: The Fake News Media response to such a proposal at February 09, 2017 02:22 PM (aZq03)

366
And if they have a legal relative in the US prior to them being 18, and the now deported parent(s) grant that person legal guardianship of the children, they can also come back.
Posted by: GnuBreed at February 09, 2017 02:17 PM (xpfRn)

simpler.... make the parents choose the Citizenship of the child at birth...

No more of this dual crap.

Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 02:22 PM (qf6WZ)

367 361
More than hotels, chinese are buying up homes in LA county to set up

birthing clinics. The 'customers' schedule their expected date, fly over

with $10k -$15k in pre-paid credit cards, have a kid at the clinic, and

fly home.
---
How hard would it be for the State Department to simply not issue travel visas to pregnant women?

Posted by: Methos

ONLY if it also included pregnant men, otherwise it's discriminatory.

Posted by: SFGoth at February 09, 2017 02:22 PM (dZ756)

368 So, you would agree that the 14th amendment needs to be repealed.

I think it needs to be substantially reworded. Its redundant to the 9th and 10th amendments, but a lot of the constitution is redundant but has to be to hammer certain concepts into stubborn minds.

Not that the document has any purpose except as a bludgeon to harm America any longer. Nobody really heeds it.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor

________

It would be far easier to simply get conservative justices on the bench.

Just like there was nothing "wrong" with the Constitution that needed changing when judges "found" abortion in the Bill of Rights.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:22 PM (m6M2c)

369 359
I think it needs to be substantially reworded. Its redundant to the 9th and 10th amendments, but a lot of the constitution is redundant but has to be to hammer certain concepts into stubborn minds.

Not that the document has any purpose except as a bludgeon to harm America any longer. Nobody really heeds it.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:20 PM (39g3+)

======================

Repeal the 14th Amendment, and you'll get the anarchy of individual states being able to organize their internal societies in ways that the residents of those states find most agreeable.

If people in one state don't like the changes made by the majority in that state, then there are no artificial barriers to them moving to a state that they find more agreeable.

It's so crazy that it might work!

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:22 PM (vur0q)

370 OT: We are having a blizzard, there's already more than a foot of snow.

I went out and bought blizzard food. I got rice and pasta and bags of dry sauce mix and cans of tomato paste and tuna fish and generally storable stuff.

I generally avoid carbs because gainz!, but the fact that I have it and that it's snowing makes me want to make big heaping vats of comfort food. I'm not even hungry, but it's calling to me.

Posted by: Bandersnatch, gentleman cad at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (mgbwf)

371 Completely unrelated:

Paris to erect bulletproof wall around Eiffel Tower

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (4YGWz)

372 I wanna be press secretary for a day just to be able to respond to the really stupid questions.

Posted by: alexthechick - all your caps are belong to me at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (mf5HN)

373 >>How hard would it be for the State Department to simply not issue travel visas to pregnant women?

'Knocked Up and Horny Volume 123' will never get made.

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (WQ9DL)

374
Could be. But legislative debates don't matter, only the text of the law matters. And is it completely irrelevant that for the first 30 years the 14th amendment was in effect it was never read to mean the child of two aliens was a US citizen?

A plain reading of the text, and an understanding of what it meant when it was passed makes it pretty hard to argue that "and under the jurisdiction thereof" doesn't mean exactly that.

Here's what the US AG had to say in 1873, "The word 'jurisdiction' must be understood to mean absolute and complete jurisdiction, such as the United States had over its citizens before the adoption of this amendment. Aliens, among whom are persons born here and naturalized abroad, dwelling or being in this country, are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States only to a limited extent. Political and military rights and duties do not pertain to them."

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 09, 2017 02:05 PM (wmaTe)

The example you gave was over an Indian who was a member of a tribe; thus jurisdiction was voluntarily limited by the United States.

Jurisdiction of the United States over incorporated territory is absolute, both over territory and people therein, unless voluntarily limited or forcibly lost.

Take, for example, a baby born in a L.A. hospital.

Is the hospital within the fully incorporated territory of the Untied States?

Yes. The the baby is born in the United States.

Is the hospital located in an area where the jurisdiction of the Untied States is limited or altogether absent?

No. The jurisdiction of the Untied States is fully exercised.

Is the baby himself or herself under the jurisdiction of the United States.

Thus, both requirements of the 14th have been fulfilled.

It really is that simple.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (OzJeO)

375 Headlines on Market Watch 'Spicer says comprehensive tax plan coming soon'....that makes me so happy..

Posted by: IC at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (a0IVu)

376 Milton Friedman had it right. Open borders in a welfare state is not compassionate, it's national suicide.

Posted by: Wytshus at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (Pl3Xw)

377 You know what happens if we lose all the illegal labor that's keeping some prices artificially low because the cost of the labor is being kept artificially low
***
And the purchasing power of your average government employee/NGO hack goes down even without paycuts since they suddenly have to pay a "living wage" for goods and services

Which is why they hate Trump...

Posted by: 18-1 at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (aZq03)

378 How hard would it be for the State Department to simply not issue travel visas to pregnant women?
Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 02:21 PM (3Liv/)

Rich Chinese already spending a fortune to do this? Impossible to catch, they'll just keep arriving earlier in the pregnancy. Unless we urine test everyone at the door.

Posted by: tsrlbke PhD(c), rogue bioethicist at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (dzmBR)

379 How hard would it be for the State Department to simply not issue travel visas to pregnant women?

For their health and safety, naturally.

I just can see the way it should play out:

ICE - pack your stuff, you're going back to 3rworldistan
Illegal - But, but, our baby is a citizen, he was born here!
ICE - yep, and they can come back when they are of majority, but you're all going back home.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (39g3+)

380 @323 Not a lawyer, but I think that's actually correct; if you live there long enough, the mansion's all yours.
----------------

Depends on the locale. In some places, merely living there for a while would be enough. In other places, there are additional requirements, such as the owner knowing that you're living there.

Posted by: junior at February 09, 2017 02:24 PM (nsZ+m)

381 Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:21 PM (39g3+)

You shouldn't be able to forcibly deport a citizen. There has to be a different solution.

Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at February 09, 2017 02:24 PM (Z9mio)

382
Imagine, for the moment, that you live in Chicago. Your minor crime isn't crossing the border illegally, but selling pot, illegally. "Everyone" knows you sell pot; the neighborhood, your Alderman, the Mayor, the Chief of Police. They all let you sell pot because, in exchange, you do a little information trading.

Then one day, you get a new mayor.

Posted by: Skandia Recluse at February 09, 2017 02:24 PM (GlP/K)

383
I wanna be press secretary for a day just to be able to respond to the really stupid questions.

Posted by: alexthechick - all your caps are belong to me at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (mf5HN)

PPV for the #WINZ.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 09, 2017 02:24 PM (PY9jH)

384 >>>Do you want to pay ten dollars for a head of lettuce?<<<

Are robots racist? Seems like they're being customized to replace fat, lazy, white people, but not illegals. WTF?

Posted by: Fritz at February 09, 2017 02:24 PM (2Mnv1)

385 >>How hard would it be for the State Department to simply not issue travel visas to pregnant women?

DHS can just contract out to Planned Parenthood. Win-win.

Posted by: Roy at February 09, 2017 02:25 PM (VndSC)

386 Did anyone think to ask her who she voted for in the last election?

Posted by: An Observation at February 09, 2017 02:25 PM (ejjFk)

387 The main birthright citizenship argument I've heard is that without it, you end up with an underclass of unassimilatable foreigners.

Posted by: Lance McCormick at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM (3FppC)

Feel free to come to Central Valley California... where you will now see an entire alternative culture.

You can't get a job around here unless you are bilingual.

They are not assimilating... because they don't have to, as they are the majority.
Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 02:19 PM (qf6WZ)

Same thing happening here in Southern California. I am back in school, studying to become a registered nurse and I was told that it would behoove me to learn Spanish. I checked out some of the job postings for register nurses and a good portion want bilingual candidates. No need to speak English here anymore...we will conform and carter to the illegals. Sigh...

Posted by: I Be That Chick at February 09, 2017 02:25 PM (S/qwI)

388 @350

You simply do not need to pass an amendmnet or get a filabuster proof majority of congress.

Congress has plenary power over immigration and naturalization.

Congress can simply pass a law stating how the 14th amendment is to be interpreted and define its jurisdiction vis a vis immigrants and immigrant classes.

Nothing more is needed.

What are the courts going to say?

We reject your intepretaion of your own jurisdiciton?

Madness!

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 02:25 PM (+lv+r)

389 >>>>The two situations are completely different. In the first case, the
U.S. exercises jurisdiction; in the later, the invading army does; this
despite being within the U.S.<<<<<

If this woman was subject to the jurisdiction of the US she would have gone through channels and gotten a green card or applied for citizenship. Instead, she went out of her way to avoid being subject to US law. She has no right to stay here and neither do her (apparently) illegal alien husband or kids.

Posted by: the guy that moves pianos for a living at February 09, 2017 02:25 PM (x3uSY)

390 2016: Brexiters, do you want the value of your house to collapse?

2017: Trumpers, do you want to pay $10 for lettuce?

Posted by: BourbonChicken at February 09, 2017 02:26 PM (VdICR)

391 Is this The Hill to die on?

Posted by: GOPe at February 09, 2017 02:26 PM (DMUuz)

392 Do you want to pay ten dollars for a head of lettuce?

Posted by: Juan McCain at February 09, 2017 02:17 PM (IqV8l)

Wouldn't bother me. I don't eat that much lettuce. And the ten-buck lettuce would likely have less E coli on it, too. I could also grow my own.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 09, 2017 02:26 PM (WDdjT)

393 372 I wanna be press secretary for a day just to be able to respond to the really stupid questions.

Posted by: alexthechick - all your caps are belong to me at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (mf5HN)

++++

You just want an excuse to be mean, mean, mean.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at February 09, 2017 02:26 PM (R+30W)

394 The 14th amendment is literally worded so that nobody can exercise or enjoy any rights, privileges, or benefits that another does not, without a court of law being involved. None.

you cannot ban children from driving, or drinking, based on the wording of the 14th amendment. You cannot prevent a drunk person from operating heavy machinery. You cannot prevent a legless man from playing soccer. The only reason this stuff is still going on is that nobody has taken it to court to challenge.

Its the single worst written amendment in US history and needs rewriting.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:26 PM (39g3+)

395 ONLY if it also included pregnant men, otherwise it's discriminatory.
---
That's the easiest deal I'll agree to all year.

Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 02:26 PM (3Liv/)

396 Being born in America makes you American, that's how its always been. The fact that people break the law to take advantage of that means we need to enforce the law and protect our borders better. With proper immigration enforcement, proper protection of the border, ending welfare for non-citzens, hammering businesses that hire illegals etc, that wouldn't be a significant issue any longer.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 01:50 PM (39g3+)

No, it hasn't. I believe it was a court case and a judicial fatwa that decreed that children born in the United States were immediately conferred citizenship regardless of their parent's status. I believe this was back in the late 1800s.

It is a stupid thing to do in this day and age, but would likely take a constitutional amendment to fix.

This is why there is birther tourism, women who pay big bucks , particularly from Japan, Eastern Europe, to come here through visas in their last month of pregnancy so they can give birth in a US hospital and the kid is now an American.

Posted by: Jen at February 09, 2017 02:27 PM (cWhln)

397 How hard would it be for the State Department to simply not issue travel visas to pregnant women?

Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 02:21 PM (3Liv/)
--------------------------------------
I think we'll need a pause in visa issuance for Chinamen/Chinawomen until we can find out what the hell is going on.

Posted by: RioBravo at February 09, 2017 02:27 PM (SsblQ)

398 What are the courts going to say?

We reject your interpretation of your own jurisdiciton?

They could easily say "your interpretation is a violation of the constitution, and x y z is why."

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:27 PM (39g3+)

399 On Drudge: 6 in 10 illegals live in 20 cities.

5 in CA, 3 in TX.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at February 09, 2017 02:28 PM (oVJmc)

400 So babies born in Sanctuary cities (which are apparently not under the jurisdiction of the United States) are not US citizens.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at February 09, 2017 02:28 PM (wrS2o)

401 >>I generally avoid carbs because gainz!, but the fact that I have it and that it's snowing makes me want to make big heaping vats of comfort food. I'm not even hungry, but it's calling to me.

I've got a pot roast in the slow cooker, just praying we don't lose power until it's done. The aroma is killing me.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 09, 2017 02:28 PM (/tuJf)

402 Is the hospital within the fully incorporated territory of the Untied States?

Yes. The the baby is born in the United States.

Honestly? If the baby was conceived in Mexico, it is as illegal as it's mother.

We rail against abortion. (Rightfully so) Calling a fetus a "baby".

Seems to me, three people crossed that border illegally. No different than if it was six months old and was carried across.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 02:28 PM (2w7OO)

403 Ten dollar lettuce lol.

What a fucking lie that was.

The price would go up marginally. We're talking cents here.

You could also automate the whole process and no more illegals or work visas or anything.

They've been sticking with Paco and Pedro because it's cheaper than the cost of the automation.

Of course, it's not cheaper for taxpayers who have to pick up the social cost while Farmer Ted pockets the profit.

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at February 09, 2017 02:28 PM (4ErVI)

404 I'd be willing to pay $10.00 for head of lettuce (although I doubt the prices would go up that much) if it means there were fewer Americans getting screwed over by identity theft.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 09, 2017 02:28 PM (fDdVG)

405 Dear sweet jeebus. As if the children of America haven't suffered enough.

Mooch to appear on "Masterchef, Jr." with Gordon Ramsay and Martha Stewart. (Newsbusters)

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 09, 2017 02:28 PM (PY9jH)

406 How hard would it be for the State Department to simply not issue travel visas to pregnant women?
Posted by: Methos at February 09, 2017 02:21 PM (3Liv/)

Rich Chinese already spending a fortune to do this? Impossible to catch, they'll just keep arriving earlier in the pregnancy. Unless we urine test everyone at the door.
Posted by: tsrlbke PhD(c), rogue bioethicist at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (dzmBR)

I don't excuse it, but, the rich Chinese are doing it to get around China's one child policy and the forced abortions of second children. They are also doing it so they can have daughters instead of disposing of them.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, who is now @SMcEvil on GAB at February 09, 2017 02:28 PM (kXoT0)

407 Posted by: Lance McCormick at February 09, 2017 02:10 PM
Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 02:19 PM
I Be That Chick at February 09, 2017 02:25 PM

The Reconquistia. Es realidad, muchachos!

Posted by: La Raza at February 09, 2017 02:28 PM (DMUuz)

408 @382, Sebastian ... leave the kid with social services? Don't really care. The parents should not be allowed to stay; if they don't like their kid that much, they can dump them on their way out.

Posted by: sunny-dee at February 09, 2017 02:29 PM (QAOZh)

409 I have thought for a while paying these people off
to deport and renounce any future application for immigration would be
the deal of the century for the American taxpayer.

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:11 PM (m6M2c)

Have you considered the savings to the Treasury in disallowing deduction for employers for their employees who have no valid SSN, or who's SSN does not match the name and DOB?

Posted by: Kindltot at February 09, 2017 02:29 PM (ry6W6)

410 Something strange about that anyway... No mention of it. It just seemed to disappear...

Posted by: deplorable donna at February 09, 2017 02:19 PM (O2RFr)

There has to be something about it that doesn't fit The Narrative.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 09, 2017 02:29 PM (WDdjT)

411 390 2016: Brexiters, do you want the value of your house to collapse?

2017: Trumpers, do you want to pay $10 for lettuce?
Posted by: BourbonChicken at February 09, 2017 02:26 PM (VdICR)

====================

Part of me wants to get back onto Facebook and see what my British friends, who all predicted at least a decade of economic stagnation from Brexit vote, are saying about their economy now.

Is it, "The recession is just around the corner! We might still have time to stop this!"

Or, "The recession is here, but the government is hiding the numbers!"

Or, *silence*.

If I didn't hate Facebook so much I'd try to find out.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:29 PM (vur0q)

412 >>They've been sticking with Paco and Pedro because it's cheaper than the cost of the automation.

Until they have an eColi Outbreak.

Think of the Insurance Savings Producers would realize with an automated fleet of lettuce pickers.

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 02:30 PM (WQ9DL)

413 @406 I don't excuse it, but, the rich Chinese are doing it to get around China's one child policy and the forced abortions of second children. They are also doing it so they can have daughters instead of disposing of them.
---------------------

I think China already abandoned that policy - in part because of the sudden lack of daughters.

Posted by: junior at February 09, 2017 02:30 PM (nsZ+m)

414 Baja? I thought we could offer it to Israel as a second homeland? Imagine what it would like in 20 years?

Posted by: rd at February 09, 2017 02:11 PM (iT57s)

The donkeys in the shows in Tiajuana will all be circumcised?

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:30 PM (OzJeO)

415 OT.

Luther Strange has been selected as Session's replacement in the Senate for Alabama.

Senator Strange.

Posted by: Jen at February 09, 2017 02:30 PM (cWhln)

416 Something strange about that anyway... No mention of it. It just seemed to disappear...
Yeah. No explanations about the supposed second shooter; claims the Moslem guy was just there shovelling snow or something, gave first aid to victims, but then ran when the cops showed up. Nothing more about the (supposed) shooter who had lib-left likes on his FB page as well as conservative (and nonpolitical) ones and memes. One of the victims and the Moslem "first aid" guy were a prof and student respectively at the shooter's university. I think there are some more conspiracy-type points as well but I can't recall them having read them only once in a comments section.

Posted by: andycanuck at February 09, 2017 02:30 PM (nlbfN)

417 With Western Europe soon to be sharia compliant screw Leftists

Posted by: Skip at February 09, 2017 02:30 PM (Frvrc)

418 I knew a guy this happen to,state came after him for five years of back
child support for a kid that wasn't his and a woman he had never met.The
state garnished his wages and it took him over a year and $12,000 in
lawyers fees to straighten it out and the state never refunded the money
it had garnished.

Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic

After retiring from the Marine Corps, my child support garnishment was suspended until my pay record moved from Active Duty Accounting to Retiree Accounting. I sent two checks for the 2 months in question, the first month being 2 weeks late, the second check was within 4 days of the normal pay schedule, smartly I paid with cashier's checks. The State of Texas listed me as delinquent for those two months. With the receipts, proof from the bank that my ex cashed the checks, Texas still needed her to sign an affidavit that those checks were considered "Child Support", hello memo line. It still took 19 months for the delinquency to be removed from Texas and my credit report.

Posted by: The Mouse that Roared at February 09, 2017 02:31 PM (7N6ox)

419 Ten dollar lettuce lol.

What a fucking lie that was.
------------------------------------
The entire Central Valley economy was going to collapse if we quit dousing field workers with pesticides too.

Posted by: RioBravo at February 09, 2017 02:31 PM (SsblQ)

420 No. The jurisdiction of the Untied States is fully exercised.

Is the baby himself or herself under the jurisdiction of the United States.

Thus, both requirements of the 14th have been fulfilled.

It really is that simple.
Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (OzJeO)

Except for children of diplomats, which were historically held to NOT be US Citizens...

But are now being granted Citizenship...

Even though those who created the 14th, were NOT giving them US Citizenship.

Clearly those who framed the 14th show their intent, by the Legal Action they took, the laws they THEN imposed...

Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 02:31 PM (qf6WZ)

421 DJIA: 20,200
#winning

Posted by: IC at February 09, 2017 02:31 PM (a0IVu)

422 415 OT.

Luther Strange has been selected as Session's replacement in the Senate for Alabama.

Senator Strange.
Posted by: Jen at February 09, 2017 02:30 PM (cWhln)

====================

"Strange things are afoot at the Circle K."
-Confucius

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:31 PM (vur0q)

423 I could also grow my own.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon

Lettuce has got to be near the top of the list of things you can sprinkle seed on the ground, ignore, and come back weeks later and harvest.

You're not going to get a carefully round head, but like everyone else in the world, I've never had the desire to sit down and eat a carefully round head of lettuce.

Posted by: E Pluribus Juan at February 09, 2017 02:31 PM (ZFUt7)

424 @415 Luther Strange has been selected as Session's replacement in the Senate for Alabama.

Senator Strange.
------------------

Does he have a doctorate in anything?

Just a completely and totally random stray thought.

Posted by: junior at February 09, 2017 02:31 PM (nsZ+m)

425 >>>I think we'll need a pause in visa issuance for Chinamen/Chinawomen until we can find out what the hell is going on.

Asian-American is the preferred nomenclature, dude.

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at February 09, 2017 02:31 PM (DFcT7)

426 Aren't citizens of Mexico, here illegally, still subject to the jurisdiction of Mexico, and not the United States?

Posted by: Dirty Randy at February 09, 2017 02:31 PM (jjaLl)

427 Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. Take the mob with you too.

Every notice how the lefts heroes fatal flaws are always they are nothing they ever claim they are?

Posted by: Marcus T at February 09, 2017 02:32 PM (6nSdj)

428 >>The donkeys in the shows in Tiajuana will all be circumcised?
Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:30 PM (OzJeO)

Seat pricing would be dependent on which side of the Sheet you want to be on.

...also, you can't come in without a tie.

Posted by: garrett at February 09, 2017 02:32 PM (WQ9DL)

429 Mooch to appear on "Masterchef, Jr." with Gordon Ramsay and Martha Stewart. (Newsbusters)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 09, 2017 02:28 PM (PY9jH)

Will Martha Stewart be wearing her Sanbenito for this auto-da-fe?

Posted by: Kindltot at February 09, 2017 02:32 PM (ry6W6)

430 Some say that we can only make anchor babies non-citizens by amending the 14th Amendment, but that's not true. In US v Wong Kim Ark (189

the Supreme Court ruled that the US born child of a Chinese couple who were here legally was a US Citizen. But that doesn't mean you can't use the "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" clause to rule differently if the mother of the child was here illegally. If so, Congress can enact such a law. If it did, we'd join virtually every other country in the world on this point.

But you'd need a SCOTUS to uphold it

Posted by: Ignoramus at February 09, 2017 02:32 PM (bQxkN)

431 She can stay in exchange for a truckload of nice fresh Mexican avocados.

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at February 09, 2017 02:32 PM (hqZPQ)

432 Hasta la vista, baby.

Posted by: Marcus T at February 09, 2017 02:32 PM (6nSdj)

433 Se Pa roads are pretty clear of snow and traffic, hardly anyone went to work. Made it home in record time.

Posted by: Skip at February 09, 2017 02:32 PM (Frvrc)

434 Good little write up on the 14th

Bottom line, it was never meant for aliens to come here and get birthright citizenship.

https://tinyurl.com/6nos99n

"The Fourteenth Amendment's citizenship clause differed from the common law rule in that it required owing complete allegiance only to the United States in advance rather than automatically bestowed by place of birth, i.e., only children born to parents who owed no foreign allegiance were to be citizens of the United States -- that is to say -- not only must a child be born but born within the complete allegiance of the United States politically and not merely within its limits. Under the common law rule it did not matter if one was born within the allegiance of another nation.

Under Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes the same Congress who had adopted the Fourteenth Amendment had enacted into law, confirmed this principle: "All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States."

Who are the subjects of a foreign power? Thomas Jefferson said "Aliens are the subjects of a foreign power." Thus, the statute can be read as All persons born in the United States who are not alien, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States.

Sen. Trumbull stated during the drafting of the above national birthright law debates that it was the goal to "make citizens of everybody born in the United States who owe allegiance to the United States," and if "the negro or white man belonged to a foreign Government he would not be a citizen."

Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee (39th Congress), James F. Wilson of Iowa, confirmed on March 1, 1866 that children under this class of aliens would not be citizens: "We must depend on the general law relating to subjects and citizens recognized by all nations for a definition, and that must lead us to the conclusion that every person born in the United States is a natural-born citizen of such States, except that of children born on our soil to temporary sojourners or representatives of foreign Governments.""

Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:32 PM (m6M2c)

435 As I'm seeing polls that reflect a significant majority in favor of the refugee ban, deporting illegals, building the wall, etc., its just going to be up to the Trump administration to ignore the hysterical bleeting of the misled sheep and plow ahead, with the understanding that most of the people who voted for him don't give a damn that Gudalupe De Rios El Cruz Se Llamos GPS was deported, if she was illegal. I'm not even sure that majority of people wouldn't like to see the 11 million illegals in this country deported, though I'm told constantly by my betters in the press and government that doing so is umpossible. Deport those who commit crimes or who are sucking at the government teat, shore up enforcement of employers hiring illegal labor and you'll have illegals leaving this country in droves.

Posted by: Baboo the Oceleot at February 09, 2017 02:33 PM (ia2he)

436 >>You're not going to get a carefully round head, but like everyone else in the world, I've never had the desire to sit down and eat a carefully round head of lettuce.

What about worshipping it?

Posted by: Re-Run at February 09, 2017 02:33 PM (WQ9DL)

437 Something strange about that anyway... No mention of it. It just seemed to disappear...

Yeah, they declared it a right wing shooting then... nothing. Just dropped off the map.

The most conspicuous and numerous groups and likes on his facebook page were Quebec separatist sites, not right wing ones.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:33 PM (39g3+)

438 What is 2/3s of 57 again?
Posted by: Barack Obama at February 09, 2017 02:20 PM

There is no math on this blog. Moose out front should'a told ya.

Ask your corpseman. They're good with fractions.

Posted by: La Raza at February 09, 2017 02:33 PM (DMUuz)

439 She sneaks across the border, commits criminal acts and then pops out two kids who are citizens.

But they play the sympathy card about the kids?

Sounds like a calculated plan to me.

Posted by: Marcus T at February 09, 2017 02:33 PM (6nSdj)

440
It really is that simple.

A suicide pact.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at February 09, 2017 02:33 PM (IqV8l)

441 415 OT.

Luther Strange has been selected as Session's replacement in the Senate for Alabama.

Senator Strange.
Posted by: Jen at February 09, 2017 02:30 PM (cWhln)

To paraphrase that great Philosopher and Intellect, Lazlo T. Hollyfeld (Real Genius)...

Things are getting STRANGE around here... ya know?

Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 02:34 PM (qf6WZ)

442 God I love snow days. Our stupid ice storm occurred on a Saturday.

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at February 09, 2017 02:34 PM (hqZPQ)

443 71 The fact that your parents brought you to this country illegally does not make you Americans, it makes you a victim of your parents' decision to break the law and a parasite.
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, who is now @SMcEvil on GAB at February 09, 2017 01:38 PM (kXoT0)

This x1000 The people telling you to leave are not the bad guys, the people who brought you without an invitation are!

Posted by: random ~~lurker~~ commenter at February 09, 2017 02:34 PM (+tRIN)

444 Great lede. Yes, this whole thing was staged by the Deep State. Only good thing is that MSM doesn't know which shiny ball to chase because there are so many

Posted by: Ignoramus at February 09, 2017 02:34 PM (bQxkN)

445 Does he have a doctorate in anything?

I think his brother Stephen does

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:34 PM (39g3+)

446 Does he have a doctorate in anything?

Just a completely and totally random stray thought.
Posted by: junior at February 09, 2017 02:31 PM (nsZ+m)

No, he's a lawyer. Prior to that a lobbyist in DC. Perfect candidate for the Senate. He'll have a lot in common with the club.

Posted by: Jen at February 09, 2017 02:34 PM (cWhln)

447 366 simpler.... make the parents choose the Citizenship of the child at birth...

No more of this dual crap.

Posted by: Don Q.

The entire aim of my post was to look at current law and practices, not to look at changes to them. And from the current laws, suggest the best solution for now.

But I like your suggestion.

Posted by: GnuBreed at February 09, 2017 02:35 PM (xpfRn)

448 The people screaming about $10 lettuce are the ones screaming that minimum wage needs to be a 'livable' $15/hr.

The boogeyman is whatever they need it to be at the moment.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at February 09, 2017 02:35 PM (oVJmc)

449 Lettuce has got to be near the top of the list of things you can sprinkle seed on the ground, ignore, and come back weeks later and harvest.

You're not going to get a carefully round head, but like everyone else in the world, I've never had the desire to sit down and eat a carefully round head of lettuce.
Posted by: E Pluribus Juan at February 09, 2017 02:31 PM (ZFUt7)

You can sprinkle the seeds on the snow and get a nice crop of leaf lettuce. My Dad did it all the time. There are dozens of Youtube videos on how to take the root ends of some lettuces and regrow the lettuce.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, who is now @SMcEvil on GAB at February 09, 2017 02:35 PM (kXoT0)

450 So babies born in Sanctuary cities (which are apparently not under the jurisdiction of the United States) are not US citizens.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at February 09, 2017 02:28 PM (wrS2o)

That would require that those cities be declared in open rebellion, similar to how the Confederacy was treated during the Civil War.

Cool.

The new "reconstruction" will fun...

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:35 PM (OzJeO)

451 Lettuce has got to be near the top of the list of things you can sprinkle seed on the ground, ignore, and come back weeks later and harvest.

Romaine lettuce is handy as hell.

Posted by: ScoggDog at February 09, 2017 02:35 PM (buBai)

452 But the good news is when she gets back to Mejico she'll be able to apply all that she learned about American capitalism! Make Mexico great again!

Brought to you by 84, er, 85 Lumber.

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at February 09, 2017 02:35 PM (hqZPQ)

453 Do these illegals steal Spanish sounding names or do they take what they can get, English, Greek, whatever? Wouldn't the legit legal Spanish people be upset if they were the victims of this stealing of SS and names? Has this been addressed and I missed it?

Posted by: washrivergal at February 09, 2017 02:35 PM (Ivjge)

454 >>436
>>You're not going to get a carefully round head, but like
everyone else in the world, I've never had the desire to sit down and
eat a carefully round head of lettuce. Posted by: Re-Run at February 09, 2017 02:33 PM (WQ9DL)

Vaal forbids this. His servants get to eat the slightly misshapen heads of lettuce; Vaal alone gets to eat the perfectly round head of lettuce. Vaal commands that it be so.

Posted by: General Zod at February 09, 2017 02:35 PM (Bdeb0)

455 446 No, he's a lawyer. Prior to that a lobbyist in DC. Perfect candidate for the Senate. He'll have a lot in common with the club.
Posted by: Jen at February 09, 2017 02:34 PM (cWhln)

=====================

Does he have a JD?

Can we call JD's doctors?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:36 PM (vur0q)

456 simpler.... make the parents choose the Citizenship of the child at birth...

No more of this dual crap.

Could a dual citizen run for president? If not, why not?

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 02:36 PM (2w7OO)

457 I don't excuse it, but, the rich Chinese are doing it to get around China's one child policy and the forced abortions of second children. They are also doing it so they can have daughters instead of disposing of them.
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, who is now @SMcEvil on GAB at February 09, 2017 02:28 PM (kXoT0)

If that were it wouldn't it be fair easier to go to South Korea? Gotta be more to it than that.
I think overall though it's a small-ish problem compared to the myriad of other problems. (Though, we're gonna have a lot of US citizens who have no knowledge of ever setting foot in the US, which is going to be really weird.)

Posted by: tsrlbke PhD(c), rogue bioethicist at February 09, 2017 02:36 PM (dzmBR)

458 >>I went out and bought blizzard food. I got rice and pasta and bags of
dry sauce mix and cans of tomato paste and tuna fish and generally
storable stuff.

No cheetos?

Posted by: Lizzy at February 09, 2017 02:36 PM (NOIQH)

459 But the good news is when she gets back to Mejico she'll be able to apply all that she learned about American capitalism! Make Mexico great again!

Brought to you by 84, er, 85 Lumber.

83 Lumber.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 02:36 PM (2w7OO)

460 If I have it right Luther Strange is Alabama's AG

Posted by: Skip at February 09, 2017 02:36 PM (Frvrc)

461 on challenging the 14th

My understanding is there is current law that makes anchor babies citizens. A change in "statute" could be done by Congress that would make other requirements, such as one US citizen parent, or whatever.

That law would then be challenged in regards to the 14thA'.

ianal, so some or most of that terminology may be wrong.

Posted by: illiniwek at February 09, 2017 02:37 PM (RWmbm)

462 @446 Does he have a doctorate in anything?

Just a completely and totally random stray thought.
Posted by: junior at February 09, 2017 02:31 PM (nsZ+m)

No, he's a lawyer. Prior to that a lobbyist in DC. Perfect candidate for the Senate. He'll have a lot in common with the club.
-------------------------

If he's a lawyer, then yes, he probably does have a doctorate. Specifically, he almost certainly has a Juris Doctorate degree.

Posted by: junior at February 09, 2017 02:37 PM (nsZ+m)

463 450
That would require that those cities be declared in open rebellion, similar to how the Confederacy was treated during the Civil War.

Cool.

The new "reconstruction" will fun...
Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:35 PM (OzJeO)

======================

Hm...I wonder how feasible it would be to declare California in open rebellion if it refused to pay federal taxes, or whatever that plan of theirs was that they floated a couple of weeks ago...

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:37 PM (vur0q)

464 "Like I said, this feels an awful lot like what lawyers call a "test-case," where an agitation group casts its defendant for a morality play they want to stage. They pick the most sympathetic defendant, one who is only barely breaking the law they hope to defeat, and engineer things so that this will be the first prosecution -- and the first loss for the prosecution. And becomes the "face" of the defendant group in the media."

This was the strategy behind Plessey v. Ferguson, which did not work out well. SCOTUS affirmed the constitutionality of separate by equal in that one.

Posted by: Milesdei at February 09, 2017 02:37 PM (q7RPx)

465 Senator Strange is 6'9" - ball player at Tulane

Posted by: Patick Henry at February 09, 2017 02:37 PM (a7IXj)

466 Occupy Chappaqua!

Posted by: The Poster Formerly Known as Mr. Barky at February 09, 2017 02:37 PM (hKi6n)

467 F***ing humans walking around all like "Look at me up on my two legs derp de derp de duhr!"

Posted by: Racist Robots at February 09, 2017 02:38 PM (VdICR)

468 https://tinyurl.com/jxfj3zd

---------------------------------

DREAM THEATER Guitarist Likes DONALD TRUMP As President, Says 'Great Things Are In Store' For America

OH JP OH ! you just stomped on a Hornets nest

Posted by: EVLINC! at February 09, 2017 02:38 PM (y3aQB)

469 If I have it right Luther Strange is Alabama's AG
Posted by: Skip at February 09, 2017 02:36 PM (Frvrc)

Yes. His office was investigating the governor for his "innapropriate" relationship he had with some honey. Then dropped it last year when the Gov. office began conducting their own investigation...into themselves?

So of course, lots of ammo for the Dems.

Posted by: Jen at February 09, 2017 02:38 PM (cWhln)

470 Posted by: Ignoramus at February 09, 2017 02:32 PM (bQxkN)

the problem is that Wong Kim Ark decision flies in the face of what those who WROTE the 14th intended... and what was then the Law.

It was one of the very first instances of the Courts Legislating from the Bench.

Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 02:39 PM (qf6WZ)

471 Pull me under, pull me under, pull me under, I'm not afraid!!!

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at February 09, 2017 02:39 PM (hqZPQ)

472 F***ing humans walking around all like "Look at me up on my two legs derp de derp de duhr!"

I don't sound like that!

Shut it.

Posted by: eleven at February 09, 2017 02:39 PM (qUNWi)

473 445 Does he have a doctorate in anything?

I think his brother Stephen does

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at February 09, 2017 02:34 PM (39g3+)

Psht, doctorate. Talk to me when he flies through an alien wormhole.

Posted by: Tony Stark at February 09, 2017 02:39 PM (WuRdh)

474 No, her husband is illegal too. They say so later in
the article. I'm sure the first part pretending he was a citizen was a
harmless honest fake news mistake (it wasn't).

Posted by: SchlongStrong

We just don't see how that fact is relevant to the plight of this poor, hardworking woman that loves this country.

Posted by: MSM Fake News at February 09, 2017 02:39 PM (1BQGO)

475 Bring on the $10 lettuce.

We'll make it back on the healthcare, policing, insurance, and housing costs.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM (oVJmc)

476 More please! The only way to stop more of these 'sob story' deportations is to STOP illegal immigration. I am hoping that this case will result in many illegals self-deporting when they see the writing on the wall. Better to have control over when you leave, than wait until ICE catches up with you.

I feel no sorrow for this woman. She was on notice since 2009. She could've self-deported then, applied for a LEGAL visa and maybe already be back in this country doing it the right way. Instead, she flouted the law for 8 years.

We have to start somewhere. I have NO problems getting rid of more people like this. Her husband and kids could've gone with her, but the illegal husband is hoping he can hide and still take advantage of our system.

Round 'em up!

Posted by: K-E at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM (HlvVu)

477 Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at February 09, 2017 02:39 PM (hqZPQ)

YEAH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: EVLINC! at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM (y3aQB)

478 all gone

Posted by: concrete girl at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM (aGAV0)

479 469 Yes. His office was investigating the governor for his "innapropriate" relationship he had with some honey. Then dropped it last year when the Gov. office began conducting their own investigation...into themselves?

So of course, lots of ammo for the Dems.
Posted by: Jen at February 09, 2017 02:38 PM (cWhln)

===================

I'm sure it will lead to a Democratic senator from Alabama in 2018.
\s

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM (vur0q)

480 Hm...I wonder how feasible it would be to declare California in open rebellion if it refused to pay federal taxes, or whatever that plan of theirs was that they floated a couple of weeks ago...
Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:37 PM (vur0q)

Shut off the water and electricity that they have basically raped away from other states.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, who is now @SMcEvil on GAB at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM (kXoT0)

481
OT - Trish Regan in a red dress and heels. Hot damn

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM (493sH)

482 Do these illegals steal Spanish sounding names or do
they take what they can get, English, Greek, whatever? Wouldn't the
legit legal Spanish people be upset if they were the victims of this
stealing of SS and names? Has this been addressed and I missed it?
Posted by: washrivergal at February 09, 2017 02:35 PM (Ivjge)

My understanding is that they use their own name, or some version of it, (and switch around the last names and middle names and put in initials or just use a relative's who went back to Mexico and loaned his green card) and some SSN, often generated at random.

And yes, I have been given to understand that legal residents who went through the process get really pissed when they are victims of ID fraud

Posted by: Kindltot at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM (ry6W6)

483 Someone told me that Griswold v. Conn. was also a test case. The law in question was not being enforced. Found a prosecutor to criminally charge some dupes who were in on it. Supreme Court here I come!

Posted by: The Poster Formerly Known as Mr. Barky at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM (hKi6n)

484 Ask your corpseman. They're good with fractions.

Posted by: La Raza at February 09, 2017 02:33 PM (DMUuz)

I disagree, corpsemen are good with fractures, but mathematics, no not so much. Every math problem that corpsemen solve has a baseline of 800 mg of Motrin, with a variable of how many days it must be distributed.
Example of corpseman math. 800 mg Motrin X 8 weeks = broken back or 800 mg Motrin X 2 weeks = dislocated shoulder

Posted by: The Mouse that Roared at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM (7N6ox)

485 Psht, doctorate. Talk to me when he flies through an alien wormhole.

Wormholes? You mean like to another dimension outside of time where you die 9000 times in a row to save the world yet somehow don't get reduced to a shivering wimp?

Posted by: Dr Strange at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM (39g3+)

486 Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet Can Help You Get Your Garden of Curses In Shape This Spring! at February 09, 2017 01:46 PM (hLRSq)

I'm sure business is booming these days.

Posted by: Captain Whitebread, King Of Karaoke at February 09, 2017 02:41 PM (rJUlF)

487 Rich Chinese rightfully fear that China will blow up internally and want a life raft somewhere. My over/under is ten years for this to happen. China may be outwardly aggressive beforehand.

When this happens it'll be proof that centrally-planned economies are sub-optimal. As if we needed more proof

Posted by: Ignoramus at February 09, 2017 02:41 PM (bQxkN)

488 Could a dual citizen run for president? If not, why not?
Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 02:36 PM (2w7OO)
-----------

I don't think so, because of conflicting loyalties. I know you can't have a TS clearance if you have dual citizenship. You have to give the non-American one up.

Posted by: bluebell at February 09, 2017 02:41 PM (sBOL1)

489 Nood

Posted by: Flyboy at February 09, 2017 02:42 PM (R3Jti)

490 "Bring on the $10 lettuce"

There will be no $10 lettuce. Paying people a decent wage may up the price, but lettuce is cheap. Plus, without cheap illegal labor, maybe farms will just put some mechanized systems instead.

I am looking forward to FAIR wages, so we really know what the cost of produce is. I don't want FAKE prices. I want real ones. And I want real jobs paid real wages.

Posted by: K-E at February 09, 2017 02:42 PM (HlvVu)

491 I'm sure it will lead to a Democratic senator from Alabama in 2018.
\s
Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM (vur0q)

LOL.
I meant Fauxcohontas. Schumer, and all the other innocents in the Senate.

Posted by: Jen at February 09, 2017 02:42 PM (cWhln)

492 So where are all the people who are victims of felony identity theft? Can they sue for damages the enablers of illegal immigrants?
The right needs to practice lawfare too.

Posted by: vivi at February 09, 2017 02:42 PM (11H2y)

493 Deported back to Mexico...

This is Uncle Phil's tactic. Send the parent home. The kids can stay. Parent's choice.

Posted by: Golfman at February 09, 2017 02:42 PM (LfcxD)

494 Bring on the $10 lettuce.

We'll make it back on the healthcare, policing, insurance, and housing costs.

That was always my attitude as well. Yes, certain things will go up in price, and some places will shut down, but the economy will bounce back pretty fast without the expense of caring for and propping up illegals here.

Posted by: Dr Strange at February 09, 2017 02:42 PM (39g3+)

495 Bring on the $10 lettuce.

We'll make it back on the healthcare, policing, insurance, and housing costs.

$10 BILLION for the wall.
$119 BILLION per year for illegals.

Fuck. Free lettuce for everyone.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 02:42 PM (2w7OO)

496 Posted by: washrivergal at February 09, 2017 02:35 PM (Ivjge)

According to reports on serial identity theft on "American's Most Wanted" they take what they can get-They don't wait for names that relate to their ethnicity.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 09, 2017 02:42 PM (fDdVG)

497 491 LOL.
I meant Fauxcohontas. Schumer, and all the other innocents in the Senate.
Posted by: Jen at February 09, 2017 02:42 PM (cWhln)

=====================

"Damn, I love flipping houses and creating unaccountable federal bureaucracies that I fill with my friends."
-Elizabeth Warren

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at February 09, 2017 02:42 PM (vur0q)

498 Posted by: Kindltot at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM (ry6W6)

Thanks!

Posted by: washrivergal at February 09, 2017 02:43 PM (Ivjge)

499 these retards from NRO othe than VDH are supposedly intelligent ???

Posted by: EVLINC! at February 09, 2017 02:43 PM (y3aQB)

500 456 simpler.... make the parents choose the Citizenship of the child at birth...

No more of this dual crap.

Could a dual citizen run for president? If not, why not?
Posted by: rickb223 at February 09, 2017 02:36 PM (2w7OO)

We already had a Dual Citizen President.

Even if you believe Obama's story of his birth, he was born a Citizen of the British Commonwealth, as well as a US Citizen.

He was also apparently adopted by Lolo Soetoro, thus making him a Citizen of Indonesia...

No paperwork has ever been found which gives up either of those other citizenships.

Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 02:43 PM (qf6WZ)

501 I don't think so, because of conflicting loyalties.
I know you can't have a TS clearance if you have dual citizenship. You
have to give the non-American one up.

Posted by: bluebell at February 09, 2017 02:41 PM (sBOL1)

Dual citizens cannot hold any clearance. The other citizenship must be renounced.

Posted by: The Mouse that Roared at February 09, 2017 02:44 PM (7N6ox)

502 "It was one of the very first instances of the Courts Legislating from the Bench."

Well there was that little Marbury v Madison contretemps back in 1803.

Posted by: Tom Servo at February 09, 2017 02:44 PM (YsaNw)

503 For the last time..

The constitution give congress plenary power over immigration and naturalization.

Congress could simply pass a law clarifying citizenship and the jurisdiction there of vis a vis immigrants, immigrant classes, non-citizens and even citizens.

Who the fuck do you think gets to define what is and isnt within or without the jurisdiciton and authority of the US?

Fucking martians?

Simple, easy end of story.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 02:45 PM (+lv+r)

504 $10 lettuce? ... maybe. One thing that will do is help other parts of the country compete with CA at those that use the illegals.

Maybe we don't need to grow the population so much, and we can move toward full employment of well-educated Americans. Robots will fill the gap in field work or other places. But Westerners need to get back to having their own babies, instead of importing them.

Posted by: illiniwek at February 09, 2017 02:47 PM (RWmbm)

505

𝄫
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Posted by: Richard the Tight at February 09, 2017 02:47 PM (GlP/K)

506
"The Fourteenth Amendment's citizenship clause differed from the common law rule in that it required owing complete allegiance only to the United States in advance rather than automatically bestowed by place of birth, i.e., only children born to parents who owed no foreign allegiance were to be citizens of the United States -- that is to say -- not only must a child be born but born within the complete allegiance of the United States politically and not merely within its limits. Under the common law rule it did not matter if one was born within the allegiance of another nation.

Under Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes the same Congress who had adopted the Fourteenth Amendment had enacted into law, confirmed this principle: "All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States."

Who are the subjects of a foreign power? Thomas Jefferson said "Aliens are the subjects of a foreign power." Thus, the statute can be read as All persons born in the United States who are not alien, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States.

Sen. Trumbull stated during the drafting of the above national birthright law debates that it was the goal to "make citizens of everybody born in the United States who owe allegiance to the United States," and if "the negro or white man belonged to a foreign Government he would not be a citizen."

Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee (39th Congress), James F. Wilson of Iowa, confirmed on March 1, 1866 that children under this class of aliens would not be citizens: "We must depend on the general law relating to subjects and citizens recognized by all nations for a definition, and that must lead us to the conclusion that every person born in the United States is a natural-born citizen of such States, except that of children born on our soil to temporary sojourners or representatives of foreign Governments.""
Posted by: Maritime at February 09, 2017 02:32 PM (m6M2c)

Two problems with your analysis.

First, statutory language you cited is inconsistent with the text of the 14th.

Second, jurisdiction within the incorporated are of the Untied States is indeed absolute. No requirement that it be exclusive is required.

Third, plenty of other Congressmen debating over the 14th Amendment offered contrasting views. Sen. Trumbell's quote was in the context of Indians who were members of sovereign tribes over which U.S. jurisdiction was explicitly not absolute

He also said 'I have already said that in my opinion birth entitles a person to citizenship, that every free-born person in this land is, by virtue of being born here, a citizen of the United States.".
http://preview.tinyurl.com/j5qnrg3

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:48 PM (OzJeO)

507 Willow'd, yes, but...

simpler.... make the parents choose the Citizenship of the child at birth...

No more of this dual crap.

The other nation has to recognize it too. If, say, Ecuador wants to consider someone an Ecuadorian citizen, what are you gonna do about it? What should be done about it? Does it matter?

Posted by: Lance McCormick at February 09, 2017 02:48 PM (u0s1P)

508 Even if you believe Obama's story of his birth, he was born a Citizen of the British Commonwealth, as well as a US Citizen.

He was also apparently adopted by Lolo Soetoro, thus making him a Citizen of Indonesia...

No paperwork has ever been found which gives up either of those other citizenships.

Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 02:43 PM (qf6WZ)

Willowed, I know, but a nit-pick: there is no such thing as "Commonwealth citizenship". That would imply that such a citizen could move at will between countries of the Commonwealth. It doesn't work that way. As a Canadian, I can't up and move to Australia. Or Kenya.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 09, 2017 02:48 PM (WDdjT)

509 374---It really is that simple.
Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (OzJeO)
------------------------------
Actually it isn't --- because in your examples you are confusing classes of persons with geographical location of birth.
In some cases Congress has determined that the question of whether you are a birthright citizen depends on the former, not on the latter.

Thus the Indian born OFF the reservation might be denied birthright citizenship and the baby of a foreign military attache would likewise be denied, regardless of whether he is born in a hospital under full jurisdiction.

All Congress need do is declare illegals to be outlaws outside the jurisdiction of the US by their very actions. Poof. Doesn't matter if they are born on the White House lawn.

(But the question is academic since Congress will not do it. )

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 09, 2017 02:48 PM (Nox3c)

510 Anyone notice the three EO's announced today? I really liked the last one about prosecuting international criminals (cough George Soros cough) like drug cartels and other criminal organizations (cough The Tides cough) Mother of Mercy, is this the start of RICO? Whee!

Posted by: vivi at February 09, 2017 02:49 PM (11H2y)

511 OT: I got an email from YouTube just now updating me on the latest video from my channel subscription for 84 Lumber. I never subscribed to 84 Lumber. I don't subscribe to any YouTube channel for that matter. I've heard that people who subscribe to right leaning channels are routinely are unsubscribed from them without their knowledge. Seems they're now subscribing them to channels they think you should be subscribed to.

Posted by: Independent George's Phone at February 09, 2017 02:49 PM (n5NRb)

512 I can live just fine without lettuce.

Posted by: EdmundBurkesShade at February 09, 2017 02:49 PM (ptQdD)

513 I hate fruit and vegetables, so I won't be affected.

Posted by: Chris M at February 09, 2017 02:50 PM (eAZVt)

514 Most big public cases turn out to be setup test cases. Rosa Parks was a setup, admittedly of a bad law. The Scopes Monkey trial was a setup by Clarence Darrow, Scopes had never actually taught the material that the court case was about, but Darrow claimed he did to get the case into litigation.

Btw, Scopes quit teaching for good right after that and became a pretty successful Oil Gas man down in Louisiana East Texas. My father in law worked in the same office as he did back in the late 50's, and said Scopes was a big man with a powerful temper. In later life he HATED when people would ask him questions about what he thought was a stupid trial, and would go off on anybody who did in a big way. So, of course, whenever there was a new hire of some youngster at the production office where they all worked, the other employees would take him aside and say "Hey, Mr. Scopes REALLY likes it when you ask him about that trial thing he was in back in the 20's, so go in there and impress him with how much you know!" Then they would send the poor kid into the lions den and wait outside for the fireworks to start.

Posted by: Tom Servo at February 09, 2017 02:51 PM (YsaNw)

515 I have had good effect using the argument: let's just use the same laws as Mexico. Or China.

Posted by: Whatserface, skipping in to report at February 09, 2017 02:52 PM (jVlNS)

516 Yes, Congress can end birthright citizenship if both parents are illegal. Current Congress won't, but that can change. It's an important part of a long-term fix to Illegal Immigration

Posted by: Ignoramus at February 09, 2017 02:52 PM (bQxkN)

517 I disagree, corpsemen are good with fractures, but
mathematics, no not so much. Every math problem that corpsemen solve has
a baseline of 800 mg of Motrin, with a variable of how many days it
must be distributed.
Example of corpseman math. 800 mg Motrin X 8 weeks = broken back or 800 mg Motrin X 2 weeks = dislocated shoulder
Posted by: The Mouse that Roared at February 09, 2017 02:40 PM

How much penicillin for missing the AAPCOD?

Posted by: Duncanthrax at February 09, 2017 02:55 PM (DMUuz)

518 Public sentiment can shift when we have a plethora of municipal and state bankruptcies

Posted by: Ignoramus at February 09, 2017 02:56 PM (bQxkN)

519
Harry Paratestes, I don't think there is any case law on birthright
citizenship. There are assumptions, but I don't think any have ever
attacked the actual meaning.

And props to Geronimo for stating it well -- if you're here
permanently, kids get birthright citizenship. If you're here temporarily
/ illegally, nada.

Which is literally how EVERY SINGLE OTHER COUNTRY ON EARTH does it.

Posted by: sunny-dee at February 09, 2017 01:53 PM (QAOZh)

The Supreme Court case that ruled states could not exclude children here illegally from their education systems at least implied the citizenship of American born children of illegals.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 09, 2017 02:58 PM (FTXAT)

520 Actually it isn't --- because in your examples you are confusing classes of persons with geographical location of birth.
In some cases Congress has determined that the question of whether you are a birthright citizen depends on the former, not on the latter.

Thus the Indian born OFF the reservation might be denied birthright citizenship and the baby of a foreign military attache would likewise be denied, regardless of whether he is born in a hospital under full jurisdiction.

All Congress need do is declare illegals to be outlaws outside the jurisdiction of the US by their very actions. Poof. Doesn't matter if they are born on the White House lawn.

(But the question is academic since Congress will not do it. )
Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 09, 2017 02:48 PM (Nox3c)

Except that "Indians not taxed" were specifically excluded, and were considered to be similar to ambassadors. Jurisdiction over the tribes was voluntarily limited, just as jurisdiction over ambassadors is voluntarily limited.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 03:00 PM (OzJeO)

521 Harry Paratestes, I don't think there is any case law on birthright

citizenship. There are assumptions, but I don't think any have ever

attacked the actual meaning.

And props to Geronimo for stating it well -- if you're here

permanently, kids get birthright citizenship. If you're here temporarily

/ illegally, nada.

Which is literally how EVERY SINGLE OTHER COUNTRY ON EARTH does it.

Posted by: sunny-dee at February 09, 2017 01:53 PM (QAOZh)

The
Supreme Court case that ruled states could not exclude children here
illegally from their education systems at least implied the citizenship
of American born children of illegals.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 09, 2017 02:58 PM (FTXAT)

Typical of liberal court decisions, SCOTUS seemed to base that decision on the no law at all but rather on the fact that they thought the states were being mean.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 09, 2017 03:00 PM (FTXAT)

522 45 I'm sure it's important to the person whose identity she stole. Or should that person suck it up for the greater good of the elites?

Posted by: Barb the Evil Genius at February 09, 2017 01:30 PM (FQKBL)
............

Aw c,mon. What's a couple thousand on a bogus Macy's account? The kids needed shoes!
Posted by: Don Lemon

Are they sure they deported the right person? Next time she should steal the identity of a legal person.

Posted by: Dirks Strewn at February 09, 2017 03:01 PM (kfcYC)

523 Actually, if the administration can hold firm this can work to their advantage. Suddenly everyone who thinks they have a big enough sob story is going to panic.

Posted by: WOPR - Nationalist at February 09, 2017 03:03 PM (J70i0)

524 Wow, if they deport Lupe, they'll definitely deport me. I'd better scramoose back over the border.

Posted by: Illegal Child Molesting, Murdering, Drunk Driving, Drug-Pushing Gang Member Identity Thief. at February 09, 2017 03:04 PM (kfcYC)

525 "$10 lettuce? ... maybe. One thing that will do is help other parts of the country compete with CA at those that use the illegals."

-------

In the beginning mechanisation of most farm work was unthinkable. If it weren't for the cheap illegal labor mechanisation of the fiddly work would have been accomplished by now.

Illegals depress more than the locals' pay packets.

Posted by: Decaf at February 09, 2017 03:05 PM (WrEuY)

526 "Harry Paratestes, I don't think there is any case law on birthright

citizenship. There are assumptions, but I don't think any have ever

attacked the actual meaning."

Wong Kim Ark comes pretty darn close. He was born here, to illegal alien parents, who later left the country and went back to China. Supreme Court said Wong Kim Ark was a citizen based solely on the fact that he was born here.

"And props to Geronimo for stating it well -- if you're here

permanently, kids get birthright citizenship. If you're here temporarily

/ illegally, nada."

It's a nice statement of what we wish were true, but it's not a statement of what is currently true. Wong Kim Ark's parents were only here temporarily, but he was deemed to be a citizen.

"Which is literally how EVERY SINGLE OTHER COUNTRY ON EARTH does it"

I cannot believe anyone can call himself a conservative and yet believe that we should use foreign law to interpret our own constitution.

"The Supreme Court case that ruled states could not exclude children here
illegally from their education systems at least implied the citizenship
of American born children of illegals."

Plyler vs. Doe, 1982. I actually knew Jim Plyler personally, he was the Superintendent of Schools for the district which was sued, that's why his name got on the case. He just died last year, he was 91.

Posted by: Tom Servo at February 09, 2017 03:06 PM (YsaNw)

527 Now that this lawbreaker has been deported it's time to reunite her with her family - in Mexico.

Posted by: Decaf at February 09, 2017 03:07 PM (WrEuY)

528 520--- Jurisdiction over the tribes was voluntarily limited, just as jurisdiction over ambassadors is voluntarily limited.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 03:00 PM (OzJeO)
----------------------------------------
And that jurisdiction was "voluntarily limited" by statute and/or treaty. Thus Congress can determine what constitutes full jurisdiction over a class of people.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 09, 2017 03:07 PM (Nox3c)

529 508 Even if you believe Obama's story of his birth, he was born a Citizen of the British Commonwealth, as well as a US Citizen.

He was also apparently adopted by Lolo Soetoro, thus making him a Citizen of Indonesia...

No paperwork has ever been found which gives up either of those other citizenships.

Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 02:43 PM (qf6WZ)

Willowed, I know, but a nit-pick: there is no such thing as "Commonwealth citizenship". That would imply that such a citizen could move at will between countries of the Commonwealth. It doesn't work that way. As a Canadian, I can't up and move to Australia. Or Kenya.
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon

Maybe Kenya-- no one's ever tried.

Posted by: Dirks Strewn at February 09, 2017 03:07 PM (kfcYC)

530 "Wong Kim Ark comes pretty darn close. He was born here, to illegal alien
parents, who later left the country and went back to China. Supreme
Court said Wong Kim Ark was a citizen based solely on the fact that he
was born here. "

Wong Kim Ark's parent were legal permanent residents at the time of his birth.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 09, 2017 03:11 PM (FTXAT)

531
Willowed, I know, but a nit-pick: there is no such thing as "Commonwealth citizenship". That would imply that such a citizen could move at will between countries of the Commonwealth. It doesn't work that way. As a Canadian, I can't up and move to Australia. Or Kenya.
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon

Maybe Kenya-- no one's ever tried.
Posted by: Dirks Strewn at February 09, 2017 03:07 PM (kfcYC)

Sorry... but there is a British Commonwealth citizenship... at least according to Wiki and others...

Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 03:14 PM (qf6WZ)

532 And that jurisdiction was "voluntarily limited" by statute and/or treaty. Thus Congress can determine what constitutes full jurisdiction over a class of people.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 09, 2017 03:07 PM (Nox3c)

So, people who are subject to our jurisdiction (if they weren't they wouldn't be illegal because the jurisdiction of the law does not apply) causes someone else (the baby) to not be within our jurisdiction?

Jurisdiction when it comes to citizenship (or previously subject status) was always territorial. The question of Indian Tribes was an exception to the rule, and defined by treaty and the Constitution.

When you say that they are not subject to our jurisdiction, you are saying the law does not apply to them, not just in practice, but legally and de jure.

Based on the Common Law, one could argue against citizenship by lack of "legiance"... which was eschewed as a requirement by the text of the 10th.

Of course, if you insist that by statute jurisdiction can be removed, than it can be removed for children of two citizen parents, as Common Law protections were jus soli and not jus sanduinus.

The question of Indian/Tribal related law and court rulings is a subject that would be interesting to read up on, as would ancient Germanic law regarding applicability of law, but that is another question altogether.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 03:23 PM (OzJeO)

533 It's bye bye time chick.

Posted by: SOMEASSHOLESTOLEMYPEN at February 09, 2017 03:32 PM (nQHw/)

534 @532

Congress has plenary power over immigration and naturilization.

They also have the sole authority to define what is within and what lies outside their jurisdiction.

They could use a standard of territorial jurisdiciton, legal jurisdiciton or pretty much whatever standard or wherever their muse takes them.

The courts simply do not have the constitutional authority to tell congress how they are to define their jurisdicition.

Period, end of story.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 03:33 PM (+lv+r)

535 "Wong Kim Ark's parent were legal permanent residents at the time of his birth."

Yep. A key fact

Posted by: Ignoramus at February 09, 2017 03:33 PM (bQxkN)

536 Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 03:23 PM (OzJeO)

Problem is that the US has declared we have worldwide Jurisdiction of our Law...

Its how we went and got Norriega in Panama, even though he had not broken a Law IN the US.

Thus, it could be argued, everyone everywhere is now within our Jurisdiction.

And yet, it is clearly not what the Framers of the 14th Amendment meant, nor what the States intended when they ratified it.

Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 03:42 PM (qf6WZ)

537 Congress has plenary power over immigration and naturilization.

They also have the sole authority to define what is within and what lies outside their jurisdiction.

They could use a standard of territorial jurisdiciton, legal jurisdiciton or pretty much whatever standard or wherever their muse takes them.

The courts simply do not have the constitutional authority to tell congress how they are to define their jurisdicition.

Period, end of story.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 03:33 PM (+lv+r)

9th Amendment would apply (citizenship from Common law), and from that 14th for consistency.

Surrender of territorial jurisdiction would apply to everyone.

Subject matter jurisdiction wouldn't be an applicable standard as it is differentiation within the subject you are seeking.

Jurisdiction over individuals would mean illegal aliens would cease to be illegal, and thus Congress, the President, nor SCOTUS would have jurisdiction to remove them from the U.S.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 03:42 PM (OzJeO)

538 Problem is that the US has declared we have worldwide Jurisdiction of our Law...

Its how we went and got Norriega in Panama, even though he had not broken a Law IN the US.

Thus, it could be argued, everyone everywhere is now within our Jurisdiction.

And yet, it is clearly not what the Framers of the 14th Amendment meant, nor what the States intended when they ratified it.
Posted by: Don Q. at February 09, 2017 03:42 PM (qf6WZ)

14th requires both jurisdiction actually exercised, and territorial incorporation.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 03:43 PM (OzJeO)

539 "Commenters say she had an arrest record for identity theft -- 'criminal impersonation'..."
I have heard assertions from the Left that illegals will steal an identity for use in job applications etc., and that this is therefore an entirely justifiable act.

Posted by: pst314 at February 09, 2017 03:45 PM (T4dRn)

540 Congress could simply write a law stating that children born to non-citizens or to people present in this country illegally are not subject to US jurisdiction and are not considered citizens themselves and are citizens of their parents birth.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Courts can't say dick.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 03:46 PM (+lv+r)

541 Congress could simply write a law stating that
children born to non-citizens or to people present in this country
illegally are not subject to US jurisdiction and are not considered
citizens themselves and are citizens of their parents birth.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Courts can't say dick.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 03:46 PM (+lv+r)

Correction... Courts SHOULDN'T say dick. Unfortunately, that hasn't stopped them for decades.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 09, 2017 03:54 PM (FTXAT)

542 Congress could simply write a law stating that children born to non-citizens or to people present in this country illegally are not subject to US jurisdiction and are not considered citizens themselves and are citizens of their parents birth.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Courts can't say dick.
Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 03:46 PM (+lv+r)

But the baby and the mother are two different persons. Parents status is irrespective of childs status.

By your logic, citizenship can be denied to babies born of two citizen parents.

Of course, if the kid isn't subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, they can't be prosecuted for any crime they commit... and yes, jus sanguis citizenship (or lack thereof) from statute does indeed allow for a child of two citizenship parents to be excluded.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 03:56 PM (OzJeO)

543 539 "Commenters say she had an arrest record for identity theft -- 'criminal impersonation'..."
I have heard assertions from the Left that illegals will steal an identity for use in job applications etc., and that this is therefore an entirely justifiable act.
__________________________

See, it's clearly our fault because we just don't make it easy enough for foreigners to break our laws!

Posted by: TrivialPursuer at February 09, 2017 03:58 PM (riF5p)

544 @537

The 9th ammendment is an inkblot and non germaine to the discussion at hand.

We are talking about congress plenary power of immigration and naturilization and how they are the sole authority over what is within and what lies outside of it's jurisdiciton.

For instance they could pass a law stating every resident of Haiti is an American citizen, who or what is to stop them?

They could pass a law stating that no resident of Haiti can become an American citizen, who or what is to stop them?

They could write a law stating that person's born to people present in this country illeagally lie outside their jurisdicition and are not conisdered US citizens for purposes of immigration and naturlization.

Period, end of story

The 14th ammendment was passed to deal with a specific problem not so Juanita could bang out an anchor baby.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 04:02 PM (+lv+r)

545 Well......bye.

Posted by: DanInMN at February 09, 2017 04:03 PM (h5ffp)

546 @542

Again...

Congress has sole constitutional authority over immigration, naturalization and citizenship and can define what is within and what lies outside its jurisdiciton.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 04:06 PM (+lv+r)

547 374 Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 02:23 PM (OzJeO)

The 14th Amendment states "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States..."

Those are two separate requirements. If birth in the US (as in, an actual physical location in the US) were enough, it would just say "All persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States....", because jurisidction would be assumed as part and parcel of birth in the US. The 14th Amendment states that it requires birth IN the US AND being subject to jurisdiction. So birth alone doesn't cut it.

Posted by: SaltyDonnie at February 09, 2017 04:08 PM (nWmg2)

548 The 9th ammendment is an inkblot and non germaine to the discussion at hand.

Common Law application of jus soli, however, is germane.

We are talking about congress plenary power of immigration and naturilization and how they are the sole authority over what is within and what lies outside of it's jurisdiciton.

Which is limited by the 9th and 14th Amendment.

For instance they could pass a law stating every resident of Haiti is an American citizen, who or what is to stop them?

Nothing.

They could pass a law stating that no resident of Haiti can become an American citizen, who or what is to stop them?

Irrelevant to the topic at hand.

They could write a law stating that person's born to people present in this country illeagally lie outside their jurisdicition and are not conisdered US citizens for purposes of immigration and naturlization.

But what, specifically, does this jurisdiction consist of? Certainly no subject matter or territorial control. But of person? You are declaring that a person is no longer subject to the jurisdiction of the law. Which laws, if not all, do you want the United States do you want these kids to unhindered by?

Period, end of story

The 14th ammendment was passed to deal with a specific problem not so Juanita could bang out an anchor baby.
Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 04:02 PM (+lv+r)

14th was more expansive, as the people debating it made clear. Jurisdiction is not based on whether you want someone here or not, it is based but whether the power of law extends or not.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 04:21 PM (OzJeO)

549 I have heard assertions from the Left that illegals
will steal an identity for use in job applications etc., and that this
is therefore an entirely justifiable act.

Posted by: pst314 at February 09, 2017 03:45 PM

I have heard that too. But if they have a good usable stolen SSN it never stops there. They are then using it for bank accounts, fraudulent US income and state tax returns, welfare, food stamps, Section 8 housing, free lunches for kids, fraudulently obtaining medical care, Obamacare tax funded health insurance, free local clinics, and on and on. This now deported woman probably tapped into every benefit known to her and so did her illegal "husband" who almost certainly was not listed on any of her records nor his income. THIS is why she was targeted even by Obama administration back in 2013 for being a greedy fraud.

Posted by: Lester at February 09, 2017 04:22 PM (8USec)

550 Period, end of story

The 14th ammendment was passed to deal with a specific problem not so Juanita could bang out an anchor baby.
Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 04:02 PM (+lv+r)

Further, if you can revoke "jurisdiction" of a descendant over the status of an antecedent., that what bars Congress from, hypothetically, revoking "jurisdiction" over the descendants of former slaves? For that matter, what would prevent a Congress full of SJWs from revoting "jurisdiction" from descendants of people who fought in the Revolutionary War?

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 04:26 PM (OzJeO)

551 @548

The 14th amendment was not more expansive, contemporary citation please, not some crafty 21st century lawyers asserting it.

Congress and congress alone get to determine the jurisidicitional parameters of it's laws vis a vis immigration, naturalizatuion and citizenship.

Why this is hard for you understand is a mystery.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 04:28 PM (+lv+r)

552 @550

Because the 13th, 14th and 15th ammendment were sepcifcally written to confer citizenship and legal status to blacks.

A hypothetical congress of SJWs could may well try what is exactly is your point?

I'm going to keep stating this as long as you would like to argue...

Congress has plenary power over immigration and naturilization and citizenship.

They also have the sole authority to define what is within and what lies outside their jurisdiction.

They could use a standard of territorial jurisdiciton, legal jurisdiciton or pretty much whatever standard or wherever their muse takes them.

The courts simply do not have the constitutional authority to tell congress how they are to define their jurisdicition.

Period, end of story.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 04:37 PM (+lv+r)

553 The 14th amendment was not more expansive, contemporary citation please, not some crafty 21st century lawyers asserting it.

Congress and congress alone get to determine the jurisidicitional parameters of it's laws vis a vis immigration, naturalizatuion and citizenship.

Why this is hard for you understand is a mystery.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 04:28 PM (+lv+r)

There is a difference between applicability of laws, and the jurisdiction of the government.

Its the difference between saying a law doesn't apply and the law can't apply.

Why this is so hard for you to understand is a mystery.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 04:46 PM (OzJeO)

554 Because the 13th, 14th and 15th ammendment were sepcifcally written to confer citizenship and legal status to blacks.

A hypothetical congress of SJWs could may well try what is exactly is your point?

I'm going to keep stating this as long as you would like to argue...

Congress has plenary power over immigration and naturilization and citizenship.

Except as limited by the 9th and 14th Amendment.

They also have the sole authority to define what is within and what lies outside their jurisdiction.

They could use a standard of territorial jurisdiciton, legal jurisdiciton or pretty much whatever standard or wherever their muse takes them.

So how would you apply territorial jurisdiction in such a way that it a applies only to the children of illegal aliens?

So how would you apply subject jurisdiction in such a way that is applies only to the children of illegal aliens?

If a child is declared not under the jurisdiction of the law, than how can any law apply to them?

Seriously, what is the specific jurisdiction the government is surrendering?

The courts simply do not have the constitutional authority to tell congress how they are to define their jurisdiction?

When the jurisdiction in connected to a right protected by the Common Law, it is protected by the 9th Amendment, and the Courts can abide in their ruling by the higher law (i.e. the Constitution) and so rule re: Congressional acts.

Period, end of story.
Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 04:37 PM (+lv+r)

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 04:57 PM (OzJeO)

555 @553

Congress decides who it's laws apply to and who lies within and who lies outside it's jurisdictional authority.

Who or what in your fevered mind decides this?

Martians?

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 05:04 PM (+lv+r)

556 @554

"So how would you apply territorial jurisdiction in such a way that it a applies only to the children of illegal aliens?"

Simple..

Citizenship shall not be conferred to any child or children born to a woman whose presence within the territorial confines of the United States is unlawful, jurisdiction is limited to the deportation and subject removal from US territory and repatriation to the unlawful aliens country of origin.

Easy peasy lemons squeezzy..

A twofer.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 05:16 PM (+lv+r)

557
Congress decides who it's laws apply to and who lies within and who lies outside it's jurisdictional authority.

Who or what in your fevered mind decides this?

Martians?
Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 05:04 PM (+lv+r)

There is a difference between deciding who the law applies to and whether or not one has jurisdiction to implement those laws.

Saying the law doesn't apply is not the same thing as saying the implementation of the law is not within the state's purview.

For example, saying that the 55 mph speed limit does not apply to cars is not the same thing as saying that cars are outside of your jurisdiction.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 05:23 PM (OzJeO)

558 @557

Serious question...

Are you insane?

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 05:26 PM (+lv+r)

559 too bad mexico is such a third world shithole millions are desperate to escape, despite being next to the US.

Posted by: willie tha pimp at February 09, 2017 05:29 PM (KO0D+)

560 Jurisdiction is not based on whether you want someone here or not, it is based but whether the power of law extends or not.

The power of the law extends to everyone in the United States; outlaw or law abiding. Thus jurisdiction can't be based on that which you claim it to be based; since everyone is included under that definition. The 14th would not have had the jurisdiction clause if it were that meaningless. Jurisdiction is clearly meant to create a sub class of everyone born here - so that not everyone born here is a citizen.

Posted by: An Observation at February 09, 2017 05:36 PM (ejjFk)

561 Citizenship shall not be conferred to any child or children born to a woman whose presence within the territorial confines of the United States is unlawful, jurisdiction is limited to the deportation and subject removal from US territory and repatriation to the unlawful aliens country of origin.

Easy peasy lemons squeezzy..

A twofer.
Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 05:16 PM (+lv+r)

If they are subject to even a limited jurisdiction, then they are subject to the jurisdiction. Thus fulfilling the requirements of the 14th Amendment.

For you example to work, you have to say something like: "The jurisdiction, in law and equity, of the United States, shall not extend to any individual, both who whose parents are present in the United States in in contravention of the immigration and nationalization laws of the United States."

This would mean that the law does not apply to such denoted individual.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 05:37 PM (OzJeO)

562 Serious question...

Are you insane?

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 05:26 PM (+lv+r)

No more insane than saying that the government ought to disincorporate its own territory, but only for some people therein.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 05:40 PM (OzJeO)

563 The power of the law extends to everyone in the United States; outlaw or law abiding. Thus jurisdiction can't be based on that which you claim it to be based; since everyone is included under that definition. The 14th would not have had the jurisdiction clause if it were that meaningless. Jurisdiction is clearly meant to create a sub class of everyone born here - so that not everyone born here is a citizen.

Posted by: An Observation at February 09, 2017 05:36 PM (ejjFk)

Um, outlawery means you are outside the law.

Not everyone born here is a citizen. Those who actually aren't subject to the jurisdiction are not citizens. But what jurisdiction, exactly, are you excluding them from? Because there is no special unique jurisdiction created by the 14th Amendment

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 05:44 PM (OzJeO)

564 @561

Your spinning and meandering about in an overly lawyerlistic manner not unlike the shyster lawyers who have taken clear meanings and perverted them beyond all reckoning.

My construction, while possibly needing some refinement, is clear and unambiguous.

Congress can define classes and sub classes of non-citizens, confer or deny citizenship and contract or expand jurisdiciton at it's sole discretion.

Where in the constitituon or 14th ammendment does it define what jurisdicition is or its expansion or attenuation?

Nowhere that's where.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 05:44 PM (+lv+r)

565 If they are subject to even a limited jurisdiction, then they are
subject to the jurisdiction. Thus fulfilling the requirements of the
14th Amendment.

Only if the law is being read by Justice Scalia's proverbial "Mad Hatter". No, the 14th amendment does not contain your Catch - 22 definition of the word "jurisdiction".

Posted by: An Observation at February 09, 2017 05:47 PM (ejjFk)

566 Your spinning and meandering about in an overly lawyerlistic manner not unlike the shyster lawyers who have taken clear meanings and perverted them beyond all reckoning.

My construction, while possibly needing some refinement, is clear and unambiguous.

Congress can define classes and sub classes of non-citizens, confer or deny citizenship and contract or expand jurisdiciton at it's sole discretion.

Where in the constitituon or 14th ammendment does it define what jurisdicition is or its expansion or attenuation?

Nowhere that's where.
Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 05:44 PM (+lv+r)

Jurisdiction is understood and practiced by the law, and jurisdiction as it applies to jus soli even more narrowly so.

What you are doing is playing "humpty-dumpty" with words.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 05:54 PM (OzJeO)

567 If they are subject to even a limited jurisdiction, then they are
subject to the jurisdiction. Thus fulfilling the requirements of the
14th Amendment.

Only if the law is being read by Justice Scalia's proverbial "Mad Hatter". No, the 14th amendment does not contain your Catch - 22 definition of the word "jurisdiction".
Posted by: An Observation at February 09, 2017 05:47 PM (ejjFk)

Then, pray tell what is the definition of the word "jurisdiction"? If it is a unique meaning, then show whence is sprang into being. If it has another extant meaning that existed when the 14th was drafted, then point it out.

If it means whatever Humpty Dumpty says it means, why bother mentioning it at all? The purpose of the 14th Amendment was to preclude Congress from saying otherwise, allowing Congress to say otherwise negates the entire purpose.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 05:58 PM (OzJeO)

568 @566

Again, you're spinning, jus soli is a legal construction and not contained in either the constitution or the bill of rights, not even the 14th amendment.

The only case even remotely germaine is Wong Kim Ark and it was not incorporated in any meaningful way, its only reference is in dicta.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 06:03 PM (+lv+r)

569 Again, you're spinning, jus soli is a legal construction and not contained in either the constitution or the bill of rights, not even the 14th amendment.

The only case even remotely germaine is Wong Kim Ark and it was not incorporated in any meaningful way, its only reference is in dicta.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 06:03 PM (+lv+r)

And it is found in the Common Law.

And recognized by courts in the U.S. before the 14th Amendment.

It also demonstrates context and actual usage.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 06:07 PM (OzJeO)

570 @567

What do you not understand about congresses ability to expand or limit jurisdiciton or jurisdicitonal authority?

For instance, who creates the inferior courts?

Who decides what jurisdiction over the law they have?

Could congress expand or contract and or limit the jurisdiciton of the inferior courts?

Can congress write laws regarding immigration, naturalization and citizenship?

Could congress limit the jurisdiction of the inferior courts with regards to immigration law?

For instance could congress write a law stating that the 9th circuit could not hear or adjudicate immigration cases and that only the 5th can?

I get it you're committed to some perverse reading of the 14th ammendment.

Noted.

Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 06:11 PM (+lv+r)

571 "Like I said, this feels an awful lot like what lawyers call a "test-case," where an agitation group casts its defendant for a morality play they want to stage. They pick the most sympathetic defendant, one who is only barely breaking the law they hope to defeat, and engineer things so that this will be the first prosecution -- and the first loss for the prosecution. And becomes the "face" of the defendant group in the media."

This sounds like something that happened in CA last year. A student's illegal dad was pulled over for a broken headlight then deported, but the local news, including the campus paper, continually lied and said he was held for deportation because of his broken headlight and downplayed his previous drug trafficking arrest and prior deportation:

http://abc7.com/news/long-beach-family-files-request-to-bring-deported-father-back/1419224/

The local news/SJW nexus used it as a pretext to demand a "don't ask don't tell" for the campus police (even though he wasn't pulled over for driving while looking illegal), demanded that they un-deport him, then they moved on to demanding "sanctuary status" for the campus.

Posted by: rows d at February 09, 2017 06:20 PM (s8z5v)

572 What do you not understand about congresses ability to expand or limit jurisdiciton or jurisdicitonal authority?

There is a difference between expanding and reducing jurisdiction and saying jurisdiction doesn't mean jurisdiction when used by the Constitution.

Are you really saying that having the jurisdiction over a class of people doesn't mean you have jurisdiction over a class of people when used specifically by the Constitution in one particular section of a particular amendment?

For instance, who creates the inferior courts?

Congress. But they can't say that the granted jurisdiction means two different things when referenced in to different places.

Who decides what jurisdiction over the law they have?

There is a difference between deciding the applicability of the law, and the power to make the law.

Could congress expand or contract and or limit the jurisdiciton of the inferior courts?

Answered above. If you want to declare that said courts don't have the jurisdiction to hear cases, that's one thing. That doesn't mean the same thing as saying that the government exercises no jurisdiction at all.

Can congress write laws regarding immigration, naturalization and citizenship?

Within the limits of the 9th and 14th Amendment (and the rest of the Constitution for that matter).

Could congress limit the jurisdiction of the inferior courts with regards to immigration law?

That they can't hear cases doesn't mean that that the individual is outside of their jurisdiction, nor does it mean that Congress limit the scope of the Constitution. You can not say that jurisdiction is limited only so far as the Constitution is concerned.

Nor does it grant Congress the right to qualify the Constitution by mandating that jurisdiction must mean absolute or exclusive jurisdiction. If any jurisdiction applied, than jurisdiction applies and the Constitution applies.

For instance could congress write a law stating that the 9th circuit could not hear or adjudicate immigration cases and that only the 5th can?

Might run afowl the equal protection clause.

I get it you're committed to some perverse reading of the 14th ammendment.

Noted.
Posted by: Kreplach at February 09, 2017 06:11 PM (+lv+r)

I'm following the plain meaning. Does the United States have jurisdiction over a person.

Define jurisdiction.

There are no qualifiers (e.g. exclusive or absolute), nor is there a special definition created just by the text of the 14th Amendment.

Seriously, define "jurisdiction" for me.

You can not say the provisions of the Constitution don't apply just because Congress, or anyone else, says so.

You can not ignore Common Law precedent or legal usage.

Because you are just making s**t up to justify de facto rewriting the Constitution because you don't like what it says.

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 09, 2017 06:35 PM (OzJeO)

573 Crap, I'm getting another schadenboner.

Posted by: WannabeAnglican at February 09, 2017 07:46 PM (5Hluh)

574 " long-time illegal with a husband and two (legal) children" - Not possible.

If the husband is a US Citizen, then she'd be a citizen too. Clearly, not the case.

Since the husband is not a citizen then, even if he's here legally, the children must are illegal aliens.

14th Amendment has TWO requirements, can't omit what comes after AND - "... and subject to the jurisdiction thereof."

Posted by: Aarradin at February 10, 2017 03:14 AM (+7Wfv)

575 Any word on the immigration status of the arrested "protesters"? Bet many, maybe all, are deportable as well.

At a minimum, prosecute for obstruction of justice.

Posted by: Aarradin at February 10, 2017 03:16 AM (+7Wfv)

Processing 0.05, elapsed 0.0654 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0217 seconds, 583 records returned.
Page size 342 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.