On Birthright Citizenship

RichTAkes! on Birthright Citizenship

I’ve posted frequently on illegal aliens, the daily alien invasion and natural born citizens for years. Especially since Obama’s natural born status was a hot topic of debate. Earlier today, news broke that Trump was asked a direct question for an HBO special by Axios, and Trump being Trump, answered it directly. 

He flatly stated that he was advised that he could end birthright citizenship outright by means of an Executive Order. That would not be my first choice, but I agree that this policy, which just seems to have evolved willy-nilly needs to end. Critics claim that a Constitutional Amendment would be required, and I agree that it would be a good proposal for the Convention of States. I disagree with the critic’s claims, Trump would not be changing the Constitution, he would be enforcing it.

Imagine for a moment that you come home from work and find a couple who have no legal basis, or jurisdiction for being here have birthed a child in your bedroom, and when you open the door they present you with their child and say congratulations, you are now a proud daddy (or mommy) of our lovely baby girl. That is exactly what birthright citizenship is.

Welcome to Rich Takes!

Harry Reid has an opinion on birthright citizenship in 1993. He must have been sane at one time.

The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments are the slave amendments. The 13th abolished slavery. The 14th addressed certain laws in the south which restricted former slaves rights, which it intended to correct. Sadly, it did not envision illegal aliens, persons present on our soil without our consent, whose very presence violates our law from bestowing citizenship upon their offspring. We did that to ourselves, and the 14th neither prescribes nor condones birthright citizenship for those without a legal presence.

Amendment XIV

Section 1.

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. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.<<

Section 2 raised some interesting points. The first deals with the Census (without specifically mentioning the census) and Representation. It says “counting whole persons residing in each state, excluding Indians not taxed”. First, the Indians not taxed means that they weren’t to be counted for purposes of representation, since they were considered citizens of their respective Indian Nations, and thus, not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”. 

Second, we have states today who benefit from representation not meant, in other words, by counting illegal aliens for purposes of the census and representation. Illegal aliens in California alone account for as many as 8 seats in the House of Representatives that they don’t deserve.

Section 2.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, …

14th Amendment | Constitution | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Exclusive: Trump targeting birthright citizenship with executive order – Axios

Nothing, not even birthright citizenship, trumps consent of the nation

…for anyone who breaks into our country without consent or overstays the terms of his or her entry, it’s as if they are physically not present on our soil. Constitutional rights on our soil, much less the ultimate prize of citizenship, only apply if you come here with consent. That is deeply rooted in social compact theory and settled law. As the court said long ago in United States v. Ju Toy (1905), a person who comes to the country illegally is to be regarded as if he had stopped at the limit of its jurisdiction, although physically he may be within its boundaries.

Already as far back as the 1950s, the Supreme Court had already said, “For over a half century this Court has held that the detention of an alien in custody pending determination of his admissibility does not legally constitute an entry though the alien is physically within the United States.” Leng May Ma v. Barber, 1958.

This is why the court said in Turner v. Williams (1904) that an inadmissible alien does not have First Amendment rights because “[h]e does not become one of the people to whom these things are secured by our Constitution by an attempt to enter forbidden by law.”

In the notorious Zadvydas v. Davis case (2001), the court reiterated that any alien “paroled in to the United States pending admissibility,” without having “gained [a] foothold,” has “not effected an entry.”

It’s absurd to assert that people who are supposed to be off our soil can, strictly by trespassing on it, achieve the ultimate benefit of citizenship for their kids.

…The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the child be born here and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” It is indisputable that even according to those opinions in which jurisdiction means territorial jurisdiction and not political jurisdiction (absurdly rendering the phrase superfluous, as noted earlier), the language of “subject to the jurisdiction” is certainly more restrictive than the purely geographical and literal phrase “dwelling in the United States.” After all, everyone concedes that Indian tribes and children born to foreign diplomats were excluded by this phrase, even though they are physically born on our soil.

Levin: ‘Completely False’ That Children Born to Illegals Have Constitutional Right to Citizenship

Senator Jacob Howard, the author of the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment – he spoke – he told us what he meant. He defined who would fall within the ‘jurisdiction of the United States.’

“Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, [meaning the states – their jurisdiction] is, by virtue of natural law and national law, a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States.

 

The Civil Rights Act of 1866 also defines citizens:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States; and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same right, in every State and Territory in the United States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none other, any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, to the contrary notwithstanding.

So the Jurisdiction clause in the 14th Amendment not only excluded foreigners, but also native American Indians from birthright citizenship status. American Indians were considered to be citizens of their own native Indian nation, which is why they conducted and ratified thousands of treaties with the various Indian nations. It would be two or three decades until an Act of Congress bestowed US citizenship upon native Indians, who today are still the only legally recognized dual citizens of these United States.

Earlier posts:

Rich TAkes on Natural Born Citizens | Rich TAkes!

The Undocumented TAkes! | Rich TAkes!

Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 168. | Rich TAkes!

On Whigs, RINOs and Federalists

On Whigs, RINOs and Federalists

It is worth noting that the Whigs took less than four years to totally disintegrate once the GOP began. The establishment GOP today (which seems to be most of them, including my representative) are nothing more than Democrat-Lite. If I wanted a Democrat, I would vote for one. Pretending that the GOP is some kind of distinctive difference from Democrats for anything other than national defense is pure fantasy.

Repealing Obamacare is not amending it. Yet the RINOs insist on amending the PPACA, and also passing yet another CR which maintains funding for Obamacare, Planned Parenthood, the OTM refugees from Central America, and continuing DACA in practice which is no different than the Democrat position.

I’m so sick of the lies from the GOP, they say they will repeal, and once we vote them in, they only want to amend. I’m sick of their cowardice. They need to be held accountable to do what they said they would do, and they have fallen way short. Couldn’t hit the broad-side of a barn as we say here in the Hoosier State.

Yesterday I was treated to back to back RINOs on FNC. Kasich, Graham, and McCarthy. If FNC keeps that up, I will be done with them too.

I’m no longer a Republican, I’m a Federalist now.

Federalist Party – Smaller Government for Americans

It’s past time to do something. The time is now!

Nuke the ACA!

It comes as no surprise to me that establishment RINOs are reneging on their promise to repeal Obamacare, instead, they are simply proposing to amend it. We should totally nuke the ACA, as we were promised.

 

The Rs are lying when they say this is the only way they can repeal Obamacare, what they aren’t telling you is that they are not repealing it. The Ds are lying too, when they say everything is hunky-doory. It is not.

RINO: Repeal In Name Only. Here are the first lines of the RINO establishment version of “repeal”. It really only amends.

>>COMMITTEE PRINT
Budget Reconciliation Legislative Recommendations Relating to Repeal and Replace of the Patient Protection and Afford-able Care Act
TITLE I—ENERGY AND
1
COMMERCE
2
Subtitle A—Patient Access to
3
Public Health Programs
4
SEC. 101. THE PREVENTION AND PUBLIC HEALTH FUND.
5
(a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (b) of section 4002 of
6
the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (42
7
U.S.C. 300u–11), as amended by section 5009 of the 21st
8
Century Cures Act, is amended—<<

 

This does not repeal the ACA, folks, it only amends it, and leaves the worst pillars of Obamacare in place. Do we really need another albatross of national health care? It is still completely unconstitutional, and is just as likely, if not more so, to collapse.  

Continue reading Nuke the ACA!

Don’t Hold Your Breath

Over 80% of Obamacare enrollees actually got Medicaid. Keeping offspring on your family plan is an easy thing to do, but it should still be left to the states, since the feds have no constitutional jurisdiction to be meddling in the health insurance market anyway.

Mandating insuring pre-existing conditions takes it out of the realm of insurance, it’s like buying home-owners insurance when your house is on fire, and demanding that the insurance company sell it to you. That is not insurance, it is welfare, and under Obamacare, everyone else pays the difference for those with pre-existing conditions. 

I would suggest that a welfare solution for those with pre-existing conditions would be a better solution, that is pretty much what everyone gets in socialized medicine countries, like the NHS in Britain, and whatever they call it in Canada. For the libs who claim via UN data that Cuba has better health care, get real. I don’t see anyone flocking to Cuba for health care, while American hospital parking lots are jammed with cars with Canadian plates near the border. Those patients are paying cash, or have private insurance over and above the Canadian socialized plan.

Obama and the Dems destroyed our health insurance for 300 million people in order to sign up less than three million actual enrollees, and most of them were subsidized by the rest of us. Over six million lost their insurance. Typical communist/socialists don’t worry too much about that, you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet they will tell you. What they won’t tell you is that their centralized federal solution is not only unconstitutional, it also sends us all on a race to the bottom. 

After all, it’s only “fair” that we all be equally miserable.

A truly free market is much, much better. We haven’t had that in health care since WWII. We owe that to socialist utopian FDR during WWII. He froze wages during the war, so in order to compete for talent, companies began adding “benefits” to employment agreements. Unions were all up with that, they called pensions and health insurance “health and welfare”. Portability for health insurance has been an issue ever since.

I was born 60 years ago, the attending physician was my parents (and mine too, until he retired when I was 12 or so) family doctor. His bill was five dollars. (in today’s dollars it might have been 500 bucks). This was before Medicare was enacted under LBJ when the feds began setting rates. Our health care system has went downhill ever since, even though prices have sky-rocketed, especially due to Obamacare, with something like 2700 pages of mandates in the original bill, not counting the hundreds of thousands of pages of regulations that came along with it.

Just repeal the damn thing. Be done with it. There is also one other statute that needs to be repealed, this was also done by FDR, I think around 1934. It made it illegal to sell health insurance across state lines, by giving it an exemption to the commerce clause. I have no idea why no one is talking about this in the media today of any sort.

Holding ACA Repeal Hostage to Replace Will Seal Its Defeat

If I’ve learned anything about Republican RINOs, it is that they can screw up a wet dream. I’m pretty sure that they will screw this up too.

On the RINO National Convention

Trump seemingly has a few good points going for him. He says he will stop the insanity of admitting middle east “refugees”, and wants to clamp down on illegal immigration. I’d like to know what he wants to do about so-called central American “refugees” whom Obama is inviting into our fair country, and once here, is lavishing resettlement and benefits galore. He wants to take care of the Vets and fix the VA, but on most other issues, he is just another progressive liberal. That is why the RINOs like him, and they can count on him to be willing to make a deal. After all, he is the self-professed king of the deal. 

Trump is not an outsider, and his business acumen is also open to question. The RINOs have declared war on Constitutional TEA Party conservatives, you know, us little people who gave them the House and later the Senate in order to stop Obama, and instead betrayed us by giving Obama everything he wanted, even after we got Boehner tossed as Speaker. I’ll stop right here, more comments below. 

Welcome to RichTAkes! On the RINO National Convention!

Check out the Trump and Hillary look-a-likes near the end!

Sadness For Friends Who Cannot Be Sad

I’m sure I’m not alone in thinking that the RNC reminds me more of a wake, instead of a look ahead at a future to support and believe in. Erick Erickson’s coherent thoughts on what is happening to the party at the RNC.

>> . . . it is just meaningless team sport in favor of their team. There is no substance, just sloganeering that means as much to each person and is taken as much differently by each person as “hope and change” was in 2008.

So much could have changed, but nothing will. And in four years, the very people who lamented Trump only to jump on his train cheerleading to the end will be back at it again because “not Clinton.” <<

The Failure of the Republican Party: Never Forget that the GOP Establishment Preferred Trump to Cruz

     

Uh-Oh: Putin Hired Internet Trolls To Pretend To Be Pro-Trump Conservatives

GOP elites get their guy in Georgia

McConnell promised to crush the TEA Party over two years ago. After smashing Bevin with Trump’s support, McDaniel, Cruz, Stutzman, and others, the RINOs are now attacking Tim Huelskamp.

The irony of the GOPe defeating Stutzman for the IN Senate nomination is that they will probably now lose that seat. I don’t think they even care. Former Governor and Senator Evan Bayh tossed his hat into the ring last week. Bayh will probably win on name recognition alone. Stutzman would have had a chance, but this Young guy, hand-picked by McConnell, is an unknown back-bencher.

CHAOS: Republican Convention Shatters As Trump Lackeys Steamroll Rules Vote

Under the rules of the convention, a majority of seven delegations could force a roll vote on the rules; it would then take a majority of the delegates to toss the rules committee’s book. At least 11 states signed on: Colorado, Washington, Utah, Minnesota, Wyoming, Maine, Iowa, Virginia, Alaska, North Dakota, and Washington D.C.

So the secretary of the convention hid behind a curtain to avoid having to accept the signatures.

What Last Week’s RNC Rules Fight Was (and Wasn’t) About – The Bull Elephant

RINO National Committee consolidates power, prohibits a vote on this set of reform rules . . . to take effect during the 2020 election cycle.

Ken Cuccinelli explains

BREAKING: VA ‘Never Trump’ Delegates NOT BOUND to Vote Trump by Law, Says Judge

The key word here is “law”

RNC Rules Fight Proves GOP Establishment Belongs To Trump

I’m guessing that Trump is now owned by the GOPe

Trump’s Acceptance Speech Was A Eulogy For The GOP

Rest In Peace…

Watch Sen. Ted Cruz’s full speech at the 2016 Republican National Convention

Continue reading On the RINO National Convention

On The Numbers

Rich Takes! On the Numbers:

Donald Trump has proven himself to be a petulant school boy, not unlike our current POTUS.

If anyone doesn’t agree with anything he says, his first response is to launch a character assassination attack, not unlike Saul Alinsky.

A very small Political Action Committee, consisting of one woman with a 20,000.00 budget recently posted a graphic meme featuring Melania in a nude photo shoot, asking the question is this what your next first lady should look like. I think it is a legitimate question, certainly the Dem’s opposition research files already were well aware of this shoot, which was published by Gentleman’s Quarterly in the UK around fifteen years ago. GQ-UK loves it, and they reposted the original article for all of our peeping Tom urges, and hits of course.

What is not commonly reported is that the shoot was taken on Donald’s gold-laden Boeing 727 jet at the time. Obviously with his full approval and knowledge. Now Trump and his people are laying the blame for this on Cruz, when we don’t even know if she even supports Cruz. By Federal law, it is illegal for POTUS campaigns to have any communication with PACs anyway. The Donald has only himself to blame, he approved the shoot, and now he should approve it again.

As always, my comments are in cayenne.

Here is RichTAkes! On the Numbers.

Links:

Donald Trump: Why Putin Loves Him  Putin-Trump

Putin Endorses Trump. Trump replies “It is always a great honor to be so nicely complimented by a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond.”

Can Donald Trump or Ted Cruz Beat Hillary Clinton? A New National Poll May Surprise You

Not only does Trump lose to Hillary, the Senate and maybe even the House turns Democrat. How does Majority Leader Chuck Schumer sound to you?

>>Trump trails Hillary 54-36, and even if that’s a bit of an outlier, it is consistent with a long track record of Trump trailing Hillary badly, including by double digits in 5 of the last 7 national polls; the RCP polling average now has Trump down 50.4 to 39.0, a result that would lose him more than 40 states and have catastrophic down-ticket results for Republicans in the Senate and House. <<

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton viewed unfavorably by majority – CBS/NYT poll

“…registered voters nationwide now hold negative opinions of the political parties’ current frontrunners. More than half of voters have unfavorable views of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump; each has a net negative rating in the double-digits.”

Hills’ negatives are only 55%. The Donald’s are 59% These are the respective front-runners, unbelievable in a sane world.

RealClearPolitics – 2016 Election Presidential Polls

If it’s any credible poll, they have a link to it.

Mark Levin: I fear we’re going to get BLOWN OUT in the general election

It’s nearly a certainty if Trump wins the nomination. In over 150 national head to head polls, Trump loses most by double digits in all and loses in all but two to Hillary who is the weakest candidate that I’ve ever seen. In just the last few days, here are some numbers:

Continue reading On The Numbers