OlDawg

13 minutes ago, UT alum said:

What do the founding fathers have to do with the 14th amendment? They were all dead when it passed. The Constitution is what they call a living document. Changes with the times. Had slavery not been abolished, the amendment would not have happened. That first sentence of section one is hard to get around. The only opinion that matters is one written by the Supreme Court.

So the Bill of Rights isn’t important, and can change anytime because the Founders are dead? Pretty lame argument.

The Constitution doesn’t change, and has never changed. Only the interpretations & additions.

But, since you say it changes with the times, then you’d have no objections to changing back to original intent of the Amendment authors.

2 hours ago, baddog said:

 

Key points about naturalized citizens: 

• Requirements:

  Requirements include continuous residence in the U.S., knowledge of English and U.S. civics, and demonstrating good moral character. 

   

• Same Rights:

  Naturalized citizens have the same rights and responsibilities as those born in the U.S.

   

• Oath of Allegiance:

  A crucial step in the naturalization process is taking an oath of allegiance to the U.S. Constitution and its laws. 

   

• Certificate of Naturalization:

  Upon successful completion of the process, a naturalized citizen receives a Certificate of Naturalization. 

• Voluntary Process:

  Naturalization is a voluntary process for non-U.S. born individuals to gain citizenship. 

   
• Eligibility:

  Generally, to become a naturalized citizen, an individual must be at least 18 years old, a lawful permanent resident (LPR) for a specified number of years (3 or 5, depending on circumstances), and meet other requirements. 

   

Pretty good summary in general. There are other scenarios that involve military service as well.

My family would be a great quiz for citizenship questions. My DIL—as mentioned—is naturalized, and one of my grandchildren was born in Japan. Can my DIL and/or grandchild have dual citizenship?

(I obviously know the answer. But, it’s an interesting situation for folks to think about that haven’t ever pondered.)

The answer is ‘yes.’ My DIL can have dual citizenship because Costa Rica allows & the U.S. doesn’t make you renounce. My grandson can’t be Japanese and American. Partly because he was born in the Naval hospital in Japan (technically U.S. soil), and also because Japan provides citizenship via parental ancestry instead of location.

The U.S. is one of only 35 countries in the world (out of 195) that still grants almost universal birthright citizenship based on geographical location. And, as some believe with a pretty strong argument IMHO, that is an incorrect interpretation of the Constitution.

If—as some believe, and has been practiced since a very liberal interpretation decades ago—everyone born in the U.S. geographically was automatically a citizen, there would never have been a need for a separate, later Act to include Native Americans as citizens. This is a very strong argument for original intent.

I’m not sure the case coming before SCOTUS this week is as cut & dried as some would believe.

It will be very interesting to watch, and could have a profound impact on how well we can enforce our borders. I would think SCOTUS will have this in the back of their mind. Of course, POTUS hasn’t enamored himself with the Judicial Branch lately with his mouth and some of his actions, and people are people, so you never know.

3 hours ago, Big girl said:

I agree that she is a citizen as well. Birthright citizenship is not going anywhere.

The U.S. already has a limited birthright citizenship scenario—even though many claim it’s much more open than the original authors & Congressional approval intended.

The question up for debate—which has never actually been adjudicated—is whether a child born to someone in the U.S. temporarily & illegally should automatically become a citizen.

No one is attempting to end birthright citizenship altogether.

33 minutes ago, Big girl said:

The fact that you were born here. If they get rid of birthright citizenship how will we know who are citizens?

How do you know now? Profile much?

You must live in a very small world. My daughter-in-law is a naturalized citizen from Costa Rica. She’s as much a citizen as you or me. She even served in the U.S. Navy. Probably has given more of herself to this country than you. She happens to be very proud to be an American.

If you read any of the articles I linked to, you’d have a lot better idea of what’s going on.

But hey…carry on…

Lake Creek 2

La Porte 0

Lake Creek wins series 2-1

Sen. Jacob Howard, who wrote the Fourteenth's Citizenship Clause believed the same thing as Bingham as evidenced by his introduction of the clause to the US Senate as follows:

[T]his amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.

*Copied from the second link in OP thread above.

 

SCOTUS got this wrong according to the author of the Amendment. IMHO, a fix would be to clarify ‘anyone born here to parent/parents with legal standing to be in the United States or its provinces or territories’. This would follow the author of the Amendment’s original intent that was voted on, and would be a compromise that works in the best interest of the public.

While it wouldn’t stop rich people from having ‘birthing vacations’ in the U.S., it would stop anchor babies & many issues with immigration & family separation. Those who are wealthy becoming citizens aren’t a drain on the public till, and the number is very small. They could also claim dual citizenship if desired. Those who are already considered citizens would remain as such.

Personally, I think SCOTUS may uphold the injunctions temporarily, but  request the issue be developed deeper for a more thorough review before a final ruling.

This issue needs to be addressed.

@tvc184

La Porte vs Lake Creek

LC won Game 1: 5-2. La Porte won Game 2: 1-0.

Game 3 tomorrow at 1:00 pm at CE King.

Interesting reads.

Thoughts?

7 minutes ago, Big girl said:

I agree, but the child should not have had to suffer

Here is a link for all. It’s actually a Snopes investigation link. Matches the numerous other NBC exclusive interview stories I’ve read previously. This story was originally an NBC exclusive. Others have picked it up from there as was said they wanted to do to raise awareness. As it’s been picked up, it’s morphed somewhat. Especially on social media.

54 minutes ago, Big girl said:

Meanwhile, the 2-year-old's father tried to petition the court to have the child's legal custody temporarily transferred to a relative who is a U.S. citizen.

You need to provide a link. The original story from February—of which there were many links—didn’t have this added. As the parents, congressional members & their legal counsel have stated, they would do whatever it took to raise awareness to try to get her back for treatment. This appears to be part of that exercise.

By the way, are you talking about the same child even? The girl with cancer from Texas was 10 I believe. You may be getting your stories mixed up.

4 minutes ago, Big girl said:

Meanwhile, the 2-year-old's father tried to petition the court to have the child's legal custody temporarily transferred to a relative who is a U.S. citizen.

Sad part is—besides the child having cancer—is if they hadn’t illegally entered the country, been ordered to immediately leave years ago for some reason, and just applied for a travel visa for their daughter’s medical treatment, they probably would have received it with little issue.

1 minute ago, Big girl said:

Regardless the child is a citizen and should've been allowed to stay here

The parents didn’t want that & had no one set up to care for her. I wouldn’t want to leave her in CPS custody either.

This is another anchor baby situation. Really, she shouldn’t have been born here in the first place.

Sounds harsh. But, that was the start of the problem.

1 hour ago, Big girl said:

Nope

A family that was deported to Mexico hopes they can find a way to return to the U.S. and ensure their 10-year-old daughter, who is a U.S. citizen, can continue her brain cancer treatment.

Immigration authorities removed the girl and four of her American siblings from Texas on Feb. 4, when they deported their undocumented parents.

 

Again, this is an incorrect summary. You’ve done this repeatedly now. The Authorities didn’t ‘remove’ the girl and her siblings. The parents didn’t want to be separated & had no power of attorney or legal paperwork for anyone they knew to keep their children while they seek a humanitarian waiver. (Which I would think they’ll get. But, I don’t know if it those are only for the treatment time, or what.)

I would think there should be a way to have some flexibility in certain circumstances. But, this is another issue where the parents were both illegally here & ignored an immediate removal order from long past.

They had their hearing before their daughter was even diagnosed, were ordered to leave, and chose not to follow those directions.

4 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Agree, very sad situation.

But to baddog’s point, the left is going to be critical of Trump’s administration whether he keeps families together or “rips” them apart.

They play these stupid political games when someone tries to fix a mess they’ve made much worse.

I don’t remember hearing this type of outcry when the Obama Administration created Operation Janus and stripped people of their naturalization status and deported them.

4 minutes ago, mat said:

That’s the way I understand it as well. Technically the children were not deported. The parents chose to bring them.

However that doesn’t not make it any less sad for the innocent children. It is a sad situation even if it’s justified. 

The anchor baby situation has been an issue for a very long time. It really needs to be addressed. Issue is, it would take an Amendment the way things are currently.

Huge win for Trump as world's second biggest carmaker relocates manufacturing to US

 

 

 

59 minutes ago, baddog said:

I believe he is using the funds from USAID that sent rubbers to Syria. Probably not enough. Might also use the funds for trans clinics in India.

Low form of wit.

 

 

55 minutes ago, Big girl said:

He deported a child who is a citzen, she has stage 4 cancer. Why didn't they put her in CPS custody so that she could continue to receive treatment?

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

The other side of the story.

It should be noted that Sen. Cassidy is an MD. He’s also always seemed fairly responsible, reasonable and caring from what I’ve read.

31 minutes ago, baddog said:

Illegal labor?????? Who would that be????

From what I understand, no one’s illegal. Just misplaced. 😁

38 minutes ago, DCT said:

Can King baby keep his trap closed.  He is suffering from dementia or he really believes what comes out of his mouth.  He throws out statistics that don’t add up or make sense.  Compulsive liar.  Once again Biden is living rent free in his mind.

He cannot stay on topic.  Canada is not for sale.  He is sounding more and more like Joe.  Rumbling and staying off topic.

 Can President Musty Musk who purchased the White House speak for himself and allow baby trump to go away.

Watched the entire presser/Q&A live. Not sure what you’re talking about. As far as Canada, you may want to keep up with current events. Not everything is as rosy as first appears.

Out of baseball coverage area matchup . But, for those interested, this is what I’m seeing.

R17 Lake Creek Vs. W20 La Porte
Game 1: Thursday, May 8 @ CE King, 7:00
Game 2: Friday, May 9 @ CE King, 7:00
Game 3: Saturday, May 10 @ CE King, 1:00 (if necessary)

10 hours ago, myrecordwashorrible said:

Does this mean we all get what Rodney claimed in the last line of the movie?

 

Could be a double meaning. The jury’s still out.

13 minutes ago, Separation Scientist said:

I checked it out when BH was playing LP softball two weeks ago. Looks like a college stadium. In fact, it’s better than a few college stadiums I have been in. Congrats on a fine project LP.    

Definitely different than most HS stadiums I’ve seen/attended. They’re going to have a bunch of food trucks, give away commemorative rally towels to the first 4,000, and other stuff. Making a big shindig out of the opening.

NE Entrance by Bulldog Centre.