Posted on Oct 31, 2018
Trump's birthright plan vs. the U.S. Constitution: Here's who wins
1.42K
65
37
5
5
0
Interesting analysis of the question of Birthright Citizenship for Children born in the US to Illegal Immigrants; from NBC no less.
Trump's birthright plan vs. the U.S. Constitution: Here's who wins
Posted from nbcnews.com
Immigration
Donald Trump
Republicans
Democrats
Democracy
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 12
7
7
0
Very eye opening..while I am not against legal immigration, children born of illegal aliens are also illegal..remove the anchor baby inventive..
(7)
(0)
7
7
0
It clearly was not. It was put there for emancipated slaves who had been denied citizenship. It was properly expanded to cover Native Americans who were members of their tribes but also subject to US law.
(7)
(0)
MSgt Steve Sweeney
SFC Pete Kain - You will forgive me if I don't consider Ben Carson a go-to reference on the U.S. Constitution. I hear he has a nice dining set though, purchased with taxpayer money.
If people want to "help" during a "foreign invasion", then why not make firearm registration mandatory? And if you think you are going to take on an air supported mechanized infantry regiment with whatever cool firearms you may have around the house, you may want to think again. You may have been able to do that to a degree in the days of flintlocks and muskets, but those days are no more.
If people want to "help" during a "foreign invasion", then why not make firearm registration mandatory? And if you think you are going to take on an air supported mechanized infantry regiment with whatever cool firearms you may have around the house, you may want to think again. You may have been able to do that to a degree in the days of flintlocks and muskets, but those days are no more.
(0)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
MSgt Steve Sweeney - I will partially agree with your musket and flintlock statement on one basis. At the time it was written the available weapons were muskets and flintlock rifles, But that is not what is used by the government today. The people have a right to be able to adequately defend themselves against the government.
(1)
(0)
MSgt Steve Sweeney
SSgt (Join to see) - And how exactly will the common folk defend themselves against the mechanized regiment with drone and air support?
(1)
(0)
Lt Col Charlie Brown
SGT Anna Kleinschmidt - I did not say it covered Native Americans at the time but that it was expanded later on to cover them.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
Interesting analysis. There are those who argue the 2d Amendment clearly wasn't intended to arm all kinds of guns nor all citizens, too. 2d Amend advocates say any kind of change weakens it. We will open a big can of worms by doing it with EO. If it was a 2d amendment change and by EO (and not on "our side"), we would all have a fit. Congress and the SC will end up with it eventually.
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google