Ocasio-Cortez and the “socialist” left

[DriveInDriveOut]

any adult who acquires citizenship as a result of an illegal act would lose said citizenship.
why should it be an different for a minor?

That pesky Constitution, always getting in Republicans' way.

 

[newfie]

That pesky Constitution, always getting in Republicans' way.

it can if its ruled that way. I dont know if its ever had a good test in front of the supreme court. if it does I'm sure original intent would be one of the considerations as I previously stated.

 

[It will be fine]

it can if its ruled that way. I dont know if its ever had a good test in front of the supreme court. if it does I'm sure original intent would be one of the considerations as I previously stated.

Read the text, I thought conservatives were all about the text, not an interpretation of the intent?

 

[Old Man Jingles]

“Give me your tired, your poor / Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”
The immigration poem from the Statue of Liberty. I actually do not know what the answer is anymore. I am second generation born here and my wife is the first. Our people came here for the same reason people are trying to get in now, the promise of a better life. I believe it is important to assimilate while holding on to your heritage.

Assimilation is the most important step a new citizen must take.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

They should be deported if the parents are here illegally birthing them. What should they be raised by the government? Should parents get to skip the line just because they hop a border?

What about birthing tourism?

Birth tourism - Wikipedia

They all need to off with that non sense.

Should don’t mean .
Itzy is Correct. It’s the law and in the original Constitution.

 

[newfie]

Read the text, I thought conservatives were all about the text, not an interpretation of the intent?

That is the text

 

[Old Man Jingles]

no one is suggesting deporting american citizens. they are suggesting we deport those who achieved citizenship as the result of their parents breaking the law and then dropping a baby on american soil as a result. the illegal act should negate any rights since that citizenship would not have happened without the illegal act that preceded it.

any adult who acquires citizenship as a result of an illegal act would lose said citizenship.
why should it be an different for a minor?

That’s goofy.
The children do not inherit the sins of their parents.
You need to slowly back away from this one.

 

[El Correcto]

Should don’t mean .
Itzy is Correct. It’s the law and in the original Constitution.

Give them citizenship they can live in another country with their parents and be taxed by America and their country.

 

[newfie]

That’s goofy.
The children do not inherit the sins of their parents.
You need to slowly back away from this one.

I don't think it's an inheritance issue at all. They don't recieve the birth if not for the illegal act of illegal entry.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

I don't think it's an inheritance issue at all. They don't recieve the birth if not for the illegal act of illegal entry.

I understand that is your opinion of how you think it ought to be.

 

[newfie]

I understand that is your opinion of how you think it ought to be.

i think its my opinion of how it should be argued someday.

a parallel argument may be -
the bible has a lot of wisdom in it that can teach us all how to lead our lives. however when god told many different folks to be fruitful and multiply he did not mean to never stop until we over crowd the planet and starve to death. he gave us the wisdom to determine that at some point we should not continue to do so.

when the constitution was written times were different in that quickly populating claimed lands was a need and a necessity . Our perspective then obviously would not cover all things.
it would not cover a time when the US government would need to know who is coming into our country and where in order to ensure that we have the necessary infrastructure , schools etc for those immigrants. Border security has become even more important for many reasons but controlled immigration to ensure the resources of one local government or another is not overloaded is probably the defining reason.

at some point legal arguments realized this and we thus evolved and women gained all the rights of men as well as people of color. the courts evolved where there was need but does so slowly to ensure that the dictates of one days mob does not define the future for the rest.

we clearly dont want activism from the bench and that is where conservatives arguing for following the constitution make that argument. I would be hard pressed i think to find too many conservatives that argue to blindly follow the constitution no mater what.

i think all of us recognize that at some point it may be necessary to evolve or expand or further redefine .

at that point i think there are two types of jurists on the court

1) those who look to legislate from the bench and then build an argument that defends their position using the constitution
2) those who always look to the constitution first and only expand on that base when there is a compelling reason to do so.

I think at some point a challenge will have to come to the court to question whether a child who is a citizen for no other reason then the fact that their parent actually broke the law
to get them on american soil is really a citizen. without that illegal act they never gain citizenship. at that point the court will have to review the original intent behind the constitution and whether that applies here.

With all that said though anchor babies are not our biggest problem. But what is a problem in this battle to control that immigration into an oderly process is the fact that liberals continue to try to leverage any and all flaws in existing immigration law to force in their future democratic voters.

 

[Sportello]

i think its my opinion of how it should be argued someday.

a parallel argument may be -
the bible has a lot of wisdom in it that can teach us all how to lead our lives. however when god told many different folks to be fruitful and multiply he did not mean to never stop until we over crowd the planet and starve to death. he gave us the wisdom to determine that at some point we should not continue to do so.

when the constitution was written times were different in that quickly populating claimed lands was a need and a necessity . Our perspective then obviously would not cover all things.
it would not cover a time when the US government would need to know who is coming into our country and where in order to ensure that we have the necessary infrastructure , schools etc for those immigrants. Border security has become even more important for many reasons but controlled immigration to ensure the resources of one local government or another is not overloaded is probably the defining reason.

at some point legal arguments realized this and we thus evolved and women gained all the rights of men as well as people of color. the courts evolved where there was need but does so slowly to ensure that the dictates of one days mob does not define the future for the rest.

we clearly dont want activism from the bench and that is where conservatives arguing for following the constitution make that argument. I would be hard pressed i think to find too many conservatives that argue to blindly follow the constitution no mater what.

i think all of us recognize that at some point it may be necessary to evolve or expand or further redefine .

at that point i think there are two types of jurists on the court

1) those who look to legislate from the bench and then build an argument that defends their position using the constitution
2) those who always look to the constitution first and only expand on that base when there is a compelling reason to do so.

I think at some point a challenge will have to come to the court to question whether a child who is a citizen for no other reason then the fact that their parent actually broke the law
to get them on american soil is really a citizen. without that illegal act they never gain citizenship. at that point the court will have to review the original intent behind the constitution and whether that applies here.

With all that said though anchor babies are not our biggest problem. But what is a problem in this battle to control that immigration into an oderly process is the fact that liberals continue to try to leverage any and all flaws in existing immigration law to force in their future democratic voters.

Are you talking about Barron and Melania?

 

[newfie]

Are you talking about Barron and Melania?

you forgetting Donald or you trying to be stupid

 

[Sportello]

you forgetting Donald or you trying to be stupid

Irony, or just trying to look stupid?

You win!

 

[newfie]

Irony, or just trying to look stupid?

You win!

certainly someone who claims to be as learned as yourself would recognize that barrons citizenship is on solid ground due to his father being Donald trump even if I were to chase your red herring about Melania.

irony or just stupid back at you?

 

[BrownArmy]

i think its my opinion of how it should be argued someday.

a parallel argument may be -
the bible has a lot of wisdom in it that can teach us all how to lead our lives. however when god told many different folks to be fruitful and multiply he did not mean to never stop until we over crowd the planet and starve to death. he gave us the wisdom to determine that at some point we should not continue to do so.

when the constitution was written times were different in that quickly populating claimed lands was a need and a necessity . Our perspective then obviously would not cover all things.
it would not cover a time when the US government would need to know who is coming into our country and where in order to ensure that we have the necessary infrastructure , schools etc for those immigrants. Border security has become even more important for many reasons but controlled immigration to ensure the resources of one local government or another is not overloaded is probably the defining reason.

at some point legal arguments realized this and we thus evolved and women gained all the rights of men as well as people of color. the courts evolved where there was need but does so slowly to ensure that the dictates of one days mob does not define the future for the rest.

we clearly dont want activism from the bench and that is where conservatives arguing for following the constitution make that argument. I would be hard pressed i think to find too many conservatives that argue to blindly follow the constitution no mater what.

i think all of us recognize that at some point it may be necessary to evolve or expand or further redefine .

at that point i think there are two types of jurists on the court

1) those who look to legislate from the bench and then build an argument that defends their position using the constitution
2) those who always look to the constitution first and only expand on that base when there is a compelling reason to do so.

I think at some point a challenge will have to come to the court to question whether a child who is a citizen for no other reason then the fact that their parent actually broke the law
to get them on american soil is really a citizen. without that illegal act they never gain citizenship. at that point the court will have to review the original intent behind the constitution and whether that applies here.

With all that said though anchor babies are not our biggest problem. But what is a problem in this battle to control that immigration into an oderly process is the fact that liberals continue to try to leverage any and all flaws in existing immigration law to force in their future democratic voters.

You’re gonna be deported

 

[Sportello]

certainly someone who claims to be as learned as yourself would recognize that barrons citizenship is on solid ground due to his father being Donald trump even if I were to chase your red herring about Melania.

irony or just stupid back at you?

Deport Melania, and her parents! Barron can stay.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Deport Melania, and her parents! Barron can stay.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

Deport Melania, and her parents! Barron can stay.

Stop!
You're going to make his head explode!

 

[Old Man Jingles]

you forgetting Donald or you trying to be stupid

She doesn't have to try!