Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[barton]

I could get into tribal law but WP explained it clearly.   The act of Congress dealt with the fact that tribes were recognized as separate sovereign nations and therefore not under US jurisdiction.  The 1924 Snyder Act essentially allowed dual citizenship, allowing a US citizen to retain tribal loyalties.  It meant if you drove from Rosebud to White River to buy groceries, you didn't become an illegal alien.   BTW,  Gus's Stop in White River has amazing corn dogs.   

[bodiddley]

The point of "subject to their jurisdiction" was to exclude Indians, or to recognize their tribal sovereignty (however you want to put it).

The only reason the USoFA got something as great as the 14th A is that post-Civil War the rebellious Southern states were excluded from Congress and therefore didn't/couldn't vote on the Amendments.  Then they were forced to ratify the Amendments as a condition of being readmitted, while the federal gov't controlled them

Most Americans probably aren't aware that the Bill of Rights placed its famed restrictions only upon the Federal Gov't and didn't apply to the States.  Until the 14th A's State Due Process clause was slowly, on a case by case basis, understood to apply the freedoms in the Bill of Rights to the States as well during the 20th C.  A judicial process termed incorporation.  Many of these are landmark cases.

Add in the Equal Protection clause and birthright citizenship, and the 14th A is the greatest law and expansion of freedom since the founding of the country.  And as I mentioned, only made possible because the hard-core racists were sidelined and not permitted to vote against it.

[bankshot1]

These pre-election week Trump promises of Hershey bars and Reese's PB cups for the base, and new tax cuts for the middle class because the other tax cut weren't so much for anyone but corps and the wealthy, and we're all healthy so who cares about pre-existing conditions, and social security and Medicare are so 1930's socialist, and not the good 30's national socialists that I identify with and am playing to, and CNN is the enemy, and a promise to re-work the constitution on the fly to make America hate again and again and again.
 

Seem like a lot of last minute desperation to fill the bags of the deplorables, when you got nothing real to give them.

How much hate do we really need?

I wonder what the White House will be giving out tonight?

Trick or tweet.   

[facilitatorn]

I can’t see trump passing up any opportunity to molest children.

[bodiddley]

Sure, it's just more red meat for racists and xenophobes, and Trump likely has no intention of issuing any such executive order, because it clearly would stand no chance of surviving a court review.  Just more racist spew ahead of the election.

[luee]

No it is not an end to birthright citizenship, he is attempting to end the farce of anchor babies and chain migration.

[josh]

"Subject to THEIR jurisdiction" is apparently the terminology at issue, Joshua.

That their parents are citizens of other lands and thus 'subject to another's jurisdiction".

Onward.  And interesting.

Yes, Kiid, I know.

That was addressed in my posts as well as in Wong Kim Ark.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Josh copies and pastes a lot of words that he doesn’t understand.

But, just for giggles, how come 54 years after the 14th ammendment was adopted did we need a Congressional Act to to grant citizenship to Native American, every one of whom had been born on American soil?

Because of the unique legal nature of reservations.

LOL

So you either do not understand the point or are unable to defend your. Bee hive as expectorated, as my autocorrect would.say.

My original post would be more accurate if I had said "tribal nations" rather than reservations.

LOL
The room’s hatred of Trump is understood but it mostly interferes with your ability to think.
My point is the birthright provision of the 14th Amendment can be clarified by an Act of Congress and does not need a Constitutional Act.
Nowhere have I concluded that the Courts will uphold an Executive Action on the matter.

[josh]

Josh copies and pastes a lot of words that he doesn’t understand.

But, just for giggles, how come 54 years after the 14th ammendment was adopted did we need a Congressional Act to to grant citizenship to Native American, every one of whom had been born on American soil?

Because the 14th Amendment explicitly excluded "Indians not taxed," as they were considered not within the jurisdiction of the United States if born on a reservation.

Again, that information was in the link I provided.
**************

As for understanding, your inability to provide either an example of what I got wrong or a solid refutation is par for the course.

[josh]

No it is not an end to birthright citizenship, he is attempting to end the farce of anchor babies and chain migration.

Except that "anchor babies" are no more real a problem than voter fraud and his proposal fails to address the incidence of "tourism babies," which are comparatively (and still only that) a real problem.

As for chain migration... that's how his wife's parents got into the country!

And you really think he cares about ending it?

As Redd would say, "LOL"

[facilitatorn]

No it is not an end to birthright citizenship, he is attempting to end the farce of anchor babies and chain migration.

He is trying to expand the crimes of indefinite secret detention and slave labor on my tax dollar. He can go fuck himself and suffer terribly for all that he does.

“Chain migration” is a big a problem as unregulated home solar installations, fact checking, and requiring seatbelts in cars.

Mail bombs and Christians shooting up Churches is a problem. Why don’t you get on that?

[josh]

Josh copies and pastes a lot of words that he doesn’t understand.

But, just for giggles, how come 54 years after the 14th ammendment was adopted did we need a Congressional Act to to grant citizenship to Native American, every one of whom had been born on American soil?

Because of the unique legal nature of reservations.

LOL

So you either do not understand the point or are unable to defend your. Bee hive as expectorated, as my autocorrect would.say.

My original post would be more accurate if I had said "tribal nations" rather than reservations.

LOL
The room’s hatred of Trump is understood but it mostly interferes with your ability to think.
My point is the birthright provision of the 14th Amendment can be clarified by an Act of Congress and does not need a Constitutional Act.
Nowhere have I concluded that the Courts will uphold an Executive Action on the matter.

Not in the way you have in mind, Redd.

The mechansims for modifying the impact of the 14th Amendment without further amendment are severely restricted:
"Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."

That doesn't give them the power to overturn it or to declare certain people born here not previously specified are now excluded from its protections.

"Nowhere have I concluded that the Courts will uphold an Executive Action on the matter."

Nowhere have you declared that they won't, either, nor what your opinion on such an effort might be.

Mealy-mouthed weasel.

[bankshot1]

Talk about false flags!

Since when has a few thousand refugees who are risking the little they have to make a long and dangeous trip to a safer haven, for the good of their kids, a threat to this country?

And a few kids with a mom from Central American, may be born here?

And the Republicans drum up more hate over this?

Someone should remind those gutless pieces of shit, that brave immigrants leaving their homeland seeking a better life for their kids is the fucking story of this country.

Home of the brave and free?

Not with Trump and the fucking Republican cowards calling the shots.

They should be ashamed of themselves, ready to trash the Constitution over this.
 

[barton]

I suspect what the narrative is, for justifying this, is that they believe that the 14th doesn't really clarify who is under U.S. jurisdiction.  The Right's hope is that they can get a court decision that somehow defines undocumented visitors as still under their own nation's jurisdiction, i.e. "they're not really here."  To me it's a muddled confusion over what "illegal" means, and they are trying to exploit that confusion.  TBH, I really don't know what the stats are on "anchor babies" or if anyone has really succeeded in compiling reliable figures. 

Every time I hear Steve King or his ilk rant about how immigrants are hurting the country, I think of all those dairies in Iowa that would have to shut down tomorrow if all the immigrants were deported.  I have followed that situation and basically there are just not enough native citizens available to do the dairy jobs.  Or who would do that kind of hard work for such low wages.  We should at the very least have an honest and accountable system of easily-obtained work permits so those people helping put food on our table don't have to live in constant fear of being hauled off in a raid by the feds.

[Driver125]

Talk about false flags!

    The Orange Idiot is always going on about how the South and Central American countries are not sending us their best people (as if these countries were rounding up their criminals and degenerate losers and sending them North). On the contrary, I’d say some of their best people are making that arduous journey (mostly on foot) just to try and live in peace and to try and scratch out some sort of living here when there is no work or condditions are too dangerous in their home country. They are people who are willing to do the the hardest and lowest paying jobs we have just to try and survive, jobs that most Americans would never think about doing.
    Let’s think about it if the shoe were on the other foot. What if there were an economic calamity in this country or some sort of war here in the U.S. and for some reason there was still peace and relative prosperity in South or Central America. How many of our people would have the inner strength to put their belongings on their backs and walk the 1200 miles or so to go to the South. How many of our people could or would learn a second language and be able to adjust to living in a completely different society (as the refugees coming here have to do) with no money in their pockets? Some would do it, as the desire for life is always strong, even in our pampered citizens. But I think fewer Americans would have the gumption to make that trip than you might think.
    So basically, if Big Mouth Trump ever gave this situation any real thought beyond the cartoonish cliches in which he thinks he would realize that those people who are struggling to come North are not their worst people but instead are some of their strongest….the kind of people who have always strengthened our country through their hard work and enthusiasm for living in our formerly welcoming land. The kind of country that welcomed someone by the name of Drumph many, many years ago (although that one proved to be a huge mistake).