None of the pollsters, consultants and other political pros seem to know what is happening with the rise of Trump, while it is all very simple, really.
We’re all really, really pissed-off!
Trump offered his immigration plan with the help of Senator Jeff Sessions, with whom I agree with at least 98% of the time.
Here are some of the bullet-points:
* Build a fence. Secure the border. I really don’t care who pays for it.
* End birth-right citizenship. The 14th Amendment actually states the exact opposite of our current policy.
* Defund the so-called sanctuary cities. They are also lawless.
* Enact mandatory E-Verify. At the moment, it’s voluntary, even though most businesses will not willing hire a known illegal alien.
Here is my biggest gripe, there is no such thing as an “undocumented” illegal alien. I’m pretty sure that they all have documents, they just aren’t American documents.
To those who claim that a person can not be illegal, if an alien is present in the US without legal sanction, you *are* an illegal alien subject to deportation.
It is time to end the invasion, and our current administration has been doing everything they can to encourage the invasion.
I was shocked to hear many pundits claim that the 14th would need to be repealed to end birth-right citizenship. I might suggest that these pundits haven’t actually read the 14th Amendment. It states the exact opposite.
If aliens have a child in the US, the parents are subject to the jurisdiction of their native country for everything beyond our criminal code. The 14th makes it clear that their offspring do not automatically enjoy US citizenship solely due to the location of their birth, their parents had no legal jurisdiction at the time.
There has only been a single Supreme Court ruling that comes close to addressing this issue. In 1898, U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, the court held that Wong Kim was a US citizen, but his parents were in the US legally. Even that ruling has been mis-appropriated to give us the birthright status that we are saddled with today.
“…In Inglis v. Trustees (1830) and Elk v. Wilkins (1884), the Supreme Court considered the status of children who are born in the United States, of fathers who owe allegiance to a sovereignty other than the United States. In both cases, the Court ruled that such children are not even citizens, let alone natural born citizens.”
In U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), the Supreme Court, reversing prior precedent, ruled that, under some circumstances, children born in the United States, of non-U.S.-citizen parents, acquire U.S. citizenship at birth. …”
defines the powers of Congress. It clearly states:
“To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,…”
Rep Steve King of Iowa has introduced legislation ending the birthright citizenship practice at the beginning of each session of the House at least since 2011.
Even Harry Reid spoke out about the birthright issue in 1993, before he went full whacko:
“Today, we somehow have come to believe that anyone born within the geographical limits of the U.S. is automatically subject to its jurisdiction; but this renders the jurisdiction clause utterly superfluous. If this had been the intention of the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment, presumably they would have said simply that all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. are thereby citizens. Indeed, during debate over the amendment, Senator Jacob Howard, the author of the citizenship clause, attempted to assure skeptical colleagues that the language was not intended to make Indians citizens of the United States. Indians, Howard conceded, were born within the nation’s geographical limits, but he steadfastly maintained that they were not subject to its jurisdiction because they owed allegiance to their tribes and not to the U.S. “
“those who framed the fourteenth amendment, and the Congress which proposed it, as well as the legislatures which adopted it, understood that the Indian tribes were not made citizens, but were excluded by the restricting phrase, “and subject to the jurisdiction,” and that such has been the universal understanding of all our public men since the amendment became a part of the Constitution.”