@Rajk999 said?????? If it is all so cut and dried, why does it have this in there????
Here is a more direct answer from AI:
Can an illegal resident be considered domiciled in the US
This is a complex legal question. Here's a nuanced explanation:
Legal Domicile Typically Requires:
Physical presence
Intent to remain
Legal right to be in the location
For Illegal Residents:
Generally cannot be considered legally "domiciled"
Lack legal st ...[text shortened]... uations
This is a nuanced area where legal interpretation can be complex and context-dependent.
""Legal Advice Recommended:""
Why does an illegal alien invader need legal advice when, after baby is born, he goes to check out of the hospital and tells a nurse, who thinks like I do, that the baby is a citizen. She responds,"...? I don't THINK so." She says we have nothing in our paper work with such a stipulation, I cannot certify the baby as a citizen. Also, a search of our records find that you are here illegally, I am going to call the Immigration Squad.!
Admittedly, this is so simple a question that I don't consider your plethora of comments from AI to have a bearing. You see, if it is so cut and dry as you say it is,..............................why would anyone need Legal Advice?
Sorry, I know my first paragraph sounds mean spirited, the rule of law can be mean-spirited on its face, I am just the messenger!
@AverageJoe1 saidExactly…if the child of an illegal is a us citizen…WHO provides the care and raises the child?
I am not really keeping up with you fellers scatter-gunning this issue, but may i comment on this one post of No1:
#1. ">>Including all children here born of resident aliens" (?) They are not resident aliens. An example of a lib (No1) ignoring an inconvenient fact.
#2. "....an alien is subject to the political jurisdiction of the country in which he RESIDES. (? ...[text shortened]... ered full-fledged citizens of the United States, when their parents aren't. It does not make sense.
The 14th will be clarified.
Contrary to what marerider states, scotus has never ruled on children of illegals born on US soil.
@AverageJoe1 saidHiding? They have permanent addresses and the majority have jobs.
Dear Readers: This is where No1 takes a left turn, off into some other tangent.
Lets see if he can come back and answer the simple question above. Hopefully he will not refer to irrelevant statutes.
I keyed off of Marauder's comments, as he mentioned 'domiciled'. I looked it up, see above, and I ask simply, how can one be domiciled and be hiding from the immigration squads at the same time? C'mon, Marauder. 😕
And they aren't the subject of the Amendment anyway.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidThe parents are given residence. The child is a US citizen, and eventually the parents apply for citizenship which they are given. This is what Trump wants to end.
Exactly…if the child of an illegal is a us citizen…WHO provides the care and raises the child?
The 14th will be clarified.
Contrary to what marerider states, scotus has never ruled on children of illegals born on US soil.
1 edit
@AverageJoe1 saidIt is complicated because an illegal alien is not domiciled. In the event where there is a birth on US soil, apparently the child is a US citizen according to the 14th Ammendment, but the parents are illegal and subject to deportation. But you cannot deport a US citizen.
?????? If it is all so cut and dried, why does it have this in there????
""Legal Advice Recommended:""
Why does an illegal alien invader need legal advice when, after baby is born, he goes to check out of the hospital and tells a nurse, who thinks like I do, that the baby is a citizen. She responds,"...? I don't THINK so." She says we have nothing in our paper w ...[text shortened]... aph sounds mean spirited, the rule of law can be mean-spirited on its face, I am just the messenger!
@Mott-The-Hoople saidI know of people who went to the US to have a baby and within 5 years they are all US citizens.
you are just making things up now
@no1marauder saidHmmmmmm. Not what ii am seeing as cameras follow the squad. Did you see them throw the Haitian in the backseat, who hollered and screamed “ I not going back to Haiti… And also. “.F Trump”
Hiding? They have permanent addresses and the majority have jobs.
And they aren't the subject of the Amendment anyway.
Marauder, so, what is he?.
And, he is Hiding, for gosh sakes. If he fathers a child, does child qualify for citizenship. He is hiding. One cannot be hiding and domiciled at the same time. I hate it, sorry.
1 edit
@Mott-The-Hoople saidI detected that Marauder is dancing around that word, illegal.
Exactly…if the child of an illegal is a us citizen…WHO provides the care and raises the child?
The 14th will be clarified.
Contrary to what marerider states, scotus has never ruled on children of illegals born on US soil.
We can let it go, I think my argument makes more sense. Libs are naturally contrarian. Example: We all know from science class the sky is not Really blue. But, if you are on a picnic blanket with a liberal girl🤓, and say 'look at how blue the sky is', she will say it is not Blue. Moral: Dont picnic with Sonhouse!!!
Allow me to say that my argument was more succinct, without resort to a myriad of links and references,,,,geez. Clear, to the point,.... I would venture that Marauder just did not bring it home.
@AverageJoe1 saidMy links are to the Amendment and the definitive SCOTUS ruling on it.
I detected that Marauder is dancing around that word, illegal.
We can let it go, I think my argument makes more sense. Libs are naturally contrarian. Example: We all know from science class the sky is not Really blue. But, if you are on a picnic blanket with a liberal girl🤓, and say 'look at how blue the sky is', she will say it is not Blue. Moral: Dont picnic with ...[text shortened]... rences,,,,geez. Clear, to the point,.... I would venture that Marauder just did not bring it home.
You keep arguing things that aren't in the Amendment or relevant to it.
@no1marauder saidActually I agree with you, it wont make it. It should make it. What is so hard about people who made a bad choice (i love the word choice) to correct the choice by going home? Why don't you go to the immigration station and help these unfortunate people? Or, should our tax dollars be used? I thought we were using our dollars to pay for abortions of girls who change their minds. It is just so crazy, Marauder, so crazy. You and AOC and the gang sure keep us hopping!
I've made my prediction; if it gets there, the most Trump's position will get is 3 votes.
It may well go unanimously against him; this issue is considered well-settled law.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidThe only issue according to the Amendment is whether these persons when born are "within the jurisdiction of the United States." Gray's opinion makes clear they are subject to all the laws, civil and criminal, of this country, so that issue was decided 126 years ago.
Exactly…if the child of an illegal is a us citizen…WHO provides the care and raises the child?
The 14th will be clarified.
Contrary to what marerider states, scotus has never ruled on children of illegals born on US soil.
@no1marauder saidWell…Can a person be illegally living in this country and be domiciled at the same time? Taken one step further, can he thus be domiciled and have to hide all the time? One step away from being handed a Ticket To Ride?
My links are to the Amendment and the definitive SCOTUS ruling on it.
You keep arguing things that aren't in the Amendment or relevant to it.
Why are all of these important questions not yet resolved by our government? Trump has a lot of work to do, but as he works 14 hrs a day, he can do it.
@no1marauder saidno, its whether they are subject to the jurisdition of…big defference.
The only issue according to the Amendment is whether these persons when born are "within the jurisdiction of the United States." Gray's opinion makes clear they are subject to all the laws, civil and criminal, of this country, so that issue was decided 126 years ago.
and the ruling you keep refering to involved the child of “legally domiciled” aliens…its has nothing to do with “illegal aliens”.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidThere's no difference and he relies on the wording of the Amendment and on the original intent of its Framers.
no, its whether they are subject to the jurisdition of…big defference.
and the ruling you keep refering to involved the child of “legally domiciled” aliens…its has nothing to do with “illegal aliens”.
Gray uses the word "all" repeatedly: he never makes the distinction you rely.