HUGE!! Trump to end birthright citizenship!!!

Why are you fixated on the 'original' intent of the 14th amendment?? The amendment is clearly written. It's meaning has not changed.

Because that is what CFM is basing his argument on. You claim the 14th is clearly written. I agree--it says anybody born in the U. S. is a citizen and that has been the law followed ever since.

CFM says it does not mean what it says because that was not the "original intent." But, I can't get him to explain the original intent. He says he already did, but he has hidden it somewhere.
 
What did the Supreme Court rule in Plessy v. Ferguson?

Since many states had segregation laws for many years, are you claiming those laws were unconstitutional? If so, are you saying there are no checks in the Constitution to prevent states from acting unconstitutionally?

Yes there are. The Supreme Court is but one avenue. They failed to act in a constitutional manner. The Supreme Court is the one that violated the Constitution with that ruling.

There is also the other States, who also own the Constitution.

There is also Congress, which failed to act.

There is also the President and the Dept of Justice, which failed to act.
 
Because that is what CFM is basing his argument on. You claim the 14th is clearly written. I agree--it says anybody born in the U. S. is a citizen and that has been the law followed ever since.
Not what the 14th amendment says. Read it again.
CFM says it does not mean what it says because that was not the "original intent." But, I can't get him to explain the original intent. He says he already did, but he has hidden it somewhere.
The meaning of the 14th amendment has not changed.
 
What did the Supreme Court rule in Plessy v. Ferguson?

Since many states had segregation laws for many years, are you claiming those laws were unconstitutional? If so, are you saying there are no checks in the Constitution to prevent states from acting unconstitutionally?

The laws should be interpreted as written. Liberel activist judges make their own laws.
 
The laws should be interpreted as written. Liberel activist judges make their own laws.

As written, the 14th amendment said no state shall deny equal protection under the law. When black schools were clearly inferior to white schools (teacher qualifications were less, etc.) it seems it is being interpreted as written.
 
As written, the 14th amendment said no state shall deny equal protection under the law. When black schools were clearly inferior to white schools (teacher qualifications were less, etc.) it seems it is being interpreted as written.

So whites were to blame when black administrators at the black schools hired inferior teachers???
 
So whites were to blame when black administrators at the black schools hired inferior teachers???

No. The state laws required lower qualifications for black teachers and their pay was less.

When Sweatt (Sweatt v. Painter) applied to the University of Texas Law School he was denied admission because there was a black law school available. Hower, the SC ruled the black law school was far inferior to UT.

They were interpreting the amendment as written. If there were any activist judges it was those who added the "separate but equal" interpretation to that provision that clearly is not there.
 
No. The state laws required lower qualifications for black teachers and their pay was less.

When Sweatt (Sweatt v. Painter) applied to the University of Texas Law School he was denied admission because there was a black law school available. Hower, the SC ruled the black law school was far inferior to UT.

They were interpreting the amendment as written. If there were any activist judges it was those who added the "separate but equal" interpretation to that provision that clearly is not there.

If blacks running the black schools coudn't do their jobs as administrators, why do any laws need to be changed?
 
If blacks running the black schools coudn't do their jobs as administrators, why do any laws need to be changed?

The state did not supply sufficient funds for the facilities, faculty, library. The issue is not whether administrators did their job but whether state laws could discriminate based on race clearly contrary to the equal protection clause.

Again, the activist judges were those imposing a separate but equal interpretation to the plain language of the 14th.
 
This is long overdue. The word "jurisdiction" in the 14th amendment obviously means POLITICAL jurisdiction not legal jurisdiction. And kids born to illegals inherit the nationality of the mother and are under the political jurisdiction of her country.

Silly sucker. Actually I believe tRump, in particular, ended his birthright citizenship at disgracing his relationship with the Almighty God that gave him life, and when the motherfkr throwed his God given blessing back at God, and sold out to the devil almost 50 years ago who took his ass kisser tRumptards' tricked souls and un American GOPer co conspires all the way to a destiny at a burning hell for a eternity on their bodies and souls. This as God's word speaks, curse God and die.
 
This is long overdue. The word "jurisdiction" in the 14th amendment obviously means POLITICAL jurisdiction not legal jurisdiction. And kids born to illegals inherit the nationality of the mother and are under the political jurisdiction of her country.

Another promise he simply failed to address.
 
Nope.. You don't know the meaning of jurisdiction. US law has jurisdiction on US soil. Not French law, or British law or Egyptian law.. Only the US has jurisdiction.
Then why did American Indians require the Snyder Act to become American citizens in 1924
 
Last edited:
Then why did American Indians require the Snyder Act to become American citizens in 1924

Because "American Indians" living on reservations were under the jurisdiction of the tribal police and courts systems until they were uniformly granted citizen status in 1924 regardless of also having native tribal citizenship in one of the "domestic dependent states".
 
Then why did American Indians require the Snyder Act to become American citizens in 1924

Pre-1924, the courts did not consider the 14th Amendment to apply to Native Americans born on reservations, because the courts ruled they were not born under American jurisdiction. It was mostly a racist claim, but there was a kernel of real law in there. The 14th Amendment says people "born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" were US Citizens. The Constitution also seems to admit that Native Americans had sovereignty in their own areas, so might not be under the jurisdiction of the United States.

There is an odd outgrowth of all this. We have treaties with many Native American tribes allowing them to ignore the borders. That allows some people on our southern border, and many people on our northern border to just cross the border.

Peter Gatien plead guilty to felony tax evasion, as part of a plea bargain over drug dealing. After his prison sentence, he was deported to his native Canada. Everyone assumed we would never see him again. But it turns out he is 1/16th First Nation(Canadian for Indian), so can cross into the USA whenever he wants.
 
This is long overdue. The word "jurisdiction" in the 14th amendment obviously means POLITICAL jurisdiction not legal jurisdiction. And kids born to illegals inherit the nationality of the mother and are under the political jurisdiction of her country.

bs. Actually, tRump ended his own so-called birthright citizenship when it comes to conspiring to overthrow a lawful and secure 2020 election that put the GOP as a mighty turd on society; lawlessly hacked in to destroy Democracy from within and anything else of a civilized nature and among his numerous other atrocities, enabling the crippling affect of COVID-19 to flourish that, in particular, ended the lives of over 900,000 Americans, etc.
 
Back
Top