Oklahoma Senator submits bill that violates the 14th Amendment

[RecycleMichael]

That is a good question as we have been unable to determine where the president of United States was born up to this day.

Yes we have. No prove in the world will satisfy those who refuse to believe facts

Remember the US national shrine (The Alamo) was built by Mexico as a church and is a shrine only because Mexico destroyed all the US defenders.

No. The Alamo was built by Spanish missionaries to educate Native Americans.

The arguments are as moot as “The little big Horn and Remember the Alamo are”,

The ironic part is that with limited tools the Great wall was erected some 1400 feet long whereas we have abandoned the short wall between Mexico and the United States presume because of graft, lack of engineering and shortage of funds.   

The Great Wall of China is 5,500 miles long. The wall between the U.S. and Mexico is 344 miles long. I know nothing of a 1,400 foot wall, but many along our turnpikes and expressways are longer than that.   

The machine that was designed either by the creator or nature to produce armies for defense, who’s ability to produce such has been curtailed by the pill as this machine come to a silent shutdown.  The ultimate end we seek will bring defeat within the next decades. The days of which we were superior, regardless of God or nature is on the horizon.       

[Ed W]

I am sure that you will be provided with a new ring for those who can and will see a new generation of a ghostly protecting army. We are on the razor edge when race becomes an unspeakable issue.  The bill being discussed is a selective racial issue. Stand by because the events  are over 5 centuries old and will not go away and the ring you seek could be knocking on your door on the norrow.   

I think I'm getting it now:

Three Rings for the Seven-Eleven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dorf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mad Men doomed to die,
One for the Turnpike Ford on his quality-is-job-one throne
In the Land of More Doors where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in raving madness bind them
In the Land of More Doors where the Shadows lie.

I needs to get me one o them rings.

[shadows]

I think I'm getting it now:

Three Rings for the Seven-Eleven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dorf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mad Men doomed to die,
One for the Turnpike Ford on his quality-is-job-one throne
In the Land of More Doors where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in raving madness bind them
In the Land of More Doors where the Shadows lie.

I needs to get me one o them rings.

There is no question that we are all being fitted for a pig ring in our nose as with the passing of time we will join the hundreds of empires who have come before us allowing our greed to overtake us.
  It was after the war that people were told that the monster to fear was inflation.  Where most countries keep a hold on inflation we allowed it to run wild. When the last television moved its operations to Mexico we said “so what”.
  Then we inflated our phony green backs along with the middle man profit and the major world suddenly had refugees who want to come here to cash in on the glory pot.
   One of the major banks established a pipeline directly to Mexico in   order to transport the phony paper there where the were able to buy our utilities we would have a hard a time doing without.     The swarm of illegal invade to our territory each day is hidden behind being able to take the inflated dollar back to their homeland where they can and do purchase our life blood daily.
   There are some very intelligent men in Washington who are trying to stand guard over try to keep this country in tact.
   Liken unto the Alamo, a church built as a fort today would be considered as “Would a rose by any other name, smell the same”.
   One could think that they taught us a lesson.       

[RecycleMichael]

major world...http://www.majorworld.com is a New York car dealer

life blood...http://www.lifeblood.org is a blood bank in Memphis

in tact...a keen sense of what to say or do to avoid giving offense; skill in dealing with difficult or delicate situations. source dictionary.com

Just trying to clarify for those playing at home...

[heironymouspasparagus]

Please direct me to legal authority/legislative history that supports the notion that smuggling pregnant illegal alien women into this country to deliver their babies on U.S. soil was what Congress and our country was thinking when the 14th Amendment was passed.

I am sure that is absolutely NOT what the intent was.  But that is the way things have been interpreted and applied.  And knowing it is still futile and worthless, I agree with the statements related to "subject to the jurisdiction of".  Illegals are pretty much not subject to the jurisdiction of the US, so how can their kids be??  Makes no sense in a  real world, but then most courts don't agree with me anyway.  (Like the court of Kurt Glassco here in town.)

 

[cynical]

Heironymous, if illegals weren't "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States, they would be immune from arrest and prosecution, just as diplomats are.  Your statement that "illegals are pretty much not subject to the jurisdiction of the US" is completely false in the real world. Illegal immigrants are arrested and prosecuted for crimes under state and federal law every day. Some are deported, some are incarcerated.  How does that happen?  It happens because state and federal courts have personal jurisdiction over them.  With the singular exception of citizens of Indian tribes before the 1920s, the courts have been completely consistent in reading the 14th Amendment exactly as it is written.  The phrase is not ambigious.  Why is this so difficult to understand, and why must we have the same arguments every time a new non-white population moves to the U.S?

If enough people don't like the 14th Amendment, the remedy is to repeal or amend it, not to redefine "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." 

I am sure that is absolutely NOT what the intent was.  But that is the way things have been interpreted and applied.  And knowing it is still futile and worthless, I agree with the statements related to "subject to the jurisdiction of".  Illegals are pretty much not subject to the jurisdiction of the US, so how can their kids be??  Makes no sense in a  real world, but then most courts don't agree with me anyway.  (Like the court of Kurt Glassco here in town.)

 

[guido911]

Heironymous, if illegals weren't "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States, they would be immune from arrest and prosecution, just as diplomats are.  Your statement that "illegals are pretty much not subject to the jurisdiction of the US" is completely false in the real world. Illegal immigrants are arrested and prosecuted for crimes under state and federal law every day. Some are deported, some are incarcerated.  How does that happen?  It happens because state and federal courts have personal jurisdiction over them.  With the singular exception of citizens of Indian tribes before the 1920s, the courts have been completely consistent in reading the 14th Amendment exactly as it is written.  The phrase is not ambigious.  Why is this so difficult to understand, and why must we have the same arguments every time a new non-white population moves to the U.S?

If enough people don't like the 14th Amendment, the remedy is to repeal or amend it, not to redefine "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." 

I even tried to "read in" an intent or alternative meaning of that guy's post and failed.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Yeah, I know they are subject to prosecution for illegal acts (except the one that got them here!).

It just always seemed to me that phrase was more related to the idea that they are subjects/citizens of the government where they are legal citizens (as in owing allegiance to).  (And no, I haven't read much on the case law.)  Kind of like if we go to another country, bribe an official for business, we are still subject to US law, even though no act was committed here.  And yeah, I know our law says that if the act is committed elsewhere it is illegal here, so the concept has been formalized.  And still liable in the other country.  Unless it is Equatorial Guinea - then bribery is mandatory, and their law says the government official MUST participate in the bribe.

Here is a big, honking diatribe about it;
http://federalistblog.us/2007/09/revisiting_subject_to_the_jurisdiction.html

Still seems kind of squirmy.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Are we mixing messages here?

The pregnant woman thing is one that I think the authors of the amendment didn't consider and I don't think there intent was for the US to become an illegal immigrant's baby magnet.

But the amendment has been interpreted as to mean if born here, citizen.  Period.  

Subject to jurisdiction is still a phrase that seems like it has been redefined somewhat over the years.  Kind of like "a well regulated militia" has been massively redefined over the years.

Squirmy.

[shadows]

When one reads through these post with an open mind, as was the intent of the writers of the constitution, one can readily see in all recorded history not one operating constitutional government has not failed within 200 years.  Laymen writers are made of experts and they cannot set down one line that ten persons  are not standing by to challenge the written interpretation.  There is no part of the constitution that can be applied nor can the condition that existed in the 1865.
   We as a conquering nation, well divided, wrote the constitution for the days at hand
   One could spend their life in the Law Library checking case law and come up empty handed.