Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Today's Posts Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 10-31-2018, 01:35 PM   #1
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,439
I find it quite comical that Trump would propose to rule by executive order after decrying and demonizing Obama for doing the same, but it's not the first time.
And from the article I posted earlier in which Bill O'Reilly (noted liberal) was arguing with Trump that Congress could not write a bill, never mind Trump penning an executive order, the considered opinion is this.
Unless or until one of those bills were to pass — and the law were challenged in the Supreme Court — we can’t know for certain whether Trump is right. But it is a speculative idea, and certainly not one that has been settled legally.


Keep in mind that he already has Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, all he needs now is Judge Jeanine.

Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!

Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?

Lets Go Darwin
Pete F. is offline  
Old 10-31-2018, 01:55 PM   #2
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
I find it quite comical that Trump would propose to rule by executive order after decrying and demonizing Obama for doing the same, but it's not the first time.
And from the article I posted earlier in which Bill O'Reilly (noted liberal) was arguing with Trump that Congress could not write a bill, never mind Trump penning an executive order, the considered opinion is this.
Unless or until one of those bills were to pass — and the law were challenged in the Supreme Court — we can’t know for certain whether Trump is right. But it is a speculative idea, and certainly not one that has been settled legally.


Keep in mind that he already has Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, all he needs now is Judge Jeanine.
gorsuch and kavanaugh are exactly like judge jenine, no more intellectually serious.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 10-31-2018, 03:04 PM   #3
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,407
its comical to see the lovers of the constitution who will shout from the rooftops what part of shall not be infringed. dont you understand

need to take their own advice

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.


for over 150 years this is the standard supported by text history and judicial precedent.. has confirm this claus reaches most US born children of Aliens including illegal aliens

But the Guy in the you tube video knows best
wdmso is offline  
Old 10-31-2018, 11:42 PM   #4
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside . . . for over 150 years this is the standard supported by text history and judicial precedent.. has confirm this claus reaches most US born children of Aliens including illegal aliens

But the Guy in the you tube video knows best
The meaning of the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is in dispute and has not been determined by SCOTUS regarding illegal aliens. And the current notion of automatic birthright citizenship for aliens has not actually been the standard in the past 150 years. In the Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873)—a civil rights case not dealing specifically with birthright citizenship—a majority of the Supreme Court mentioned in passing that "the phrase 'subject to its jurisdiction' was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States".[51]

The guy in the video is detailing the opinions of "experts" who oppose the notion of automatic birthright citizenship given to children born here to illegal aliens.

If you could point out why specific items he presents in the video are wrong, that would be appreciated. But if you can only present opposing views and claim their validity lies in being more numerous, that is not proof that they are right. Truth is not up to a vote--except by vote of the Supreme arbiter which has not yet decided upon it.
detbuch is offline  
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com