@AverageJoe1 saidThere is a process for revising the constitution. Whatever this is isn't that. It seems like they're asking SCOTUS to just make stuff up.
I think that the present process of becoming a citizen should be revised.
But , I PREDICT that they will bail, it will be too much for the judges, though they know it is too liberal.
Everybody vote, and enjoy watching the arguments on each side, I am not sure of the time.
1 edit
@wildgrass saidYou make a good point, but this is not about revising the constitution, as I might have intimated. It is to decide the one question about an executive order., and I suggest everyone get familiar with the real issue and not allow your minds to stray and waste a great moment to hear some great arguments over one issue.
There is a process for revising the constitution. Whatever this is isn't that. It seems like they're asking SCOTUS to just make stuff up.
The suit is to have the justices rule on an executive order by Trump that saysA child born on U.S. soil would NOT be a citizen if their parents are in the country illegally, orin the U.S. temporarily visa, etc) unless at least one parent is a citizen or lawful permanent resident. 
That is the nature of this case, in a nutshell, and make note that it all turns on that one pesky sentence in the constitution…” subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”.
That is huge, and it will be extremely interesting to watch them wrestle with it. I doubt that the executive order will hold up, myself.
@AverageJoe1 saidHuh?
You make a good point, but this is not about revising the constitution, as I might have intimated. It is to decide the one question about an executive order., and I suggest everyone get familiar with the real issue and not allow your minds to stray and waste a great moment to hear some great arguments over one issue.
The suit is to have the justices rule on an execu ...[text shortened]... ly interesting to watch them wrestle with it. I doubt that the executive order will hold up, myself.
@wildgrass saidSee… You already try to complicate. The court will hear the validity of an executive order by Trump. Pretty easy stuff.
Huh?
@AverageJoe1 saidYour original post suggested constitutional changes which isn't what SCOTUS does
See… You already try to complicate. The court will hear the validity of an executive order by Trump. Pretty easy stuff.
@AverageJoe1 saidShould be a slam dunk 9-0; the SCOTUS already decided the issue about 130 years ago.
I think that the present process of becoming a citizen should be revised.
But , I PREDICT that they will bail, it will be too much for the judges, though they know it is too liberal.
Everybody vote, and enjoy watching the arguments on each side, I am not sure of the time.
1 edit
@wildgrass saidYou are correct, I immediately in my reply said, yes, I did say ‘revision’ , which is job of Congress, I was excited and didn’t proof my post. My bad.
Your original post suggested constitutional changes which isn't what SCOTUS does
I do feel that my immediate clarification, and suggesting that everyone pay attention to the one issue at hand,was well written. So maybe I made up for it.
In summary😚, we have all discussed that phrase “within the jurisdiction” on this forum many many times. Well, set your computers aside, sit back and watch SCOTUS at 10 o’clock Eastern in the morning and we will let them decide..
Can’t wait!!!!!!! Thankyou President Trump for all of your efforts. We all hope that this is one of your successes. Why do I think it will be? Fox has been running some clips of Donald 36 years ago where he has been preaching exactly what he is doing right now. The guy is really a visionary.
So was howard Hughes, no one liked him very much either. Life is funny that way..
@no1marauder saidRoe v Wade was decided some time ago but it’s gone now
Should be a slam dunk 9-0; the SCOTUS already decided the issue about 130 years ago.
@no1marauder saidThere was no invasion at the time, they were not supporting everyone in sight, and millions of aliens who were ALREADY citizens other countries.
Should be a slam dunk 9-0; the SCOTUS already decided the issue about 130 years ago.
Do you truly have no common sense?
@AThousandYoung saidSometimes Thousand sees the picture.
Roe v Wade was decided some time ago but it’s gone now
@AverageJoe1 saidThere still isn't any invasion and people born here aren't citizens of other countries.
There was no invasion at the time, they were not supporting everyone in sight, and millions of aliens who were ALREADY citizens other countries.
Do you truly have no common sense?
If you don't like the Constitution, amend it.
@AThousandYoung saidOne could correctly say that Roe was somewhat controversial from its inception.
Roe v Wade was decided some time ago but it’s gone now
By contrast, Wong Kim Ark has been accepted law for more than 125 years and only recently has there developed fringe theories questioning it.
@no1marauder saidCould you respect my informative thread...., some might not even know what is going to happen at 10AM tomorrow.
There still isn't any invasion and people born here aren't citizens of other countries.
If you don't like the Constitution, amend it.
So I put this thread here to apprise them, and me, of that, with a bit of a primer as to the heart of the case.
Whether there is an invasion, it is in the eyes of the beholder. If I behold a person coming thru my front door without my permission...........Marauder.....he is invading my house. No argument there. You should drop it, you are being childish.
Your saying that born children are not citizens of other countries....? I guess they are not. They are, though, children of people who are not citizens of THIS country, and therein lies the crux of rhe case. Read my explanation above. Jesus.
Is this too simple for you? And secondly, ......oh nevermind, tune in at 10AM. Cant wait for the questions of the fat Jackson person. You will say ...."That is what I would have asked!' Me, I would ask the lawyers....'What is your end game, what is everyone trying to accomplish here, given that the end result will INDEED dilute our society in many ways. Our way of life, schooling, principal language, there is so much that we will be required to bend to. If they return to their countries of citizenship, we will not have such problems. Put another way.....WHY DO IT? Many countries do NOT hand out free citizenships."
I like the constitution. Follow it. Why was the phrase put in that paragraph? Why? To make a certain distinction? What was the distinction? Don't answer that question.
@no1marauder saidIf the children born here aren’t citizens of other countries, you say…..then what are they?
There still isn't any invasion and people born here aren't citizens of other countries.
If you don't like the Constitution, amend it.
Follow me marauder,… If I am in Paris with my American family, and my wife has a baby while I am there, I will ask you the same question…What country will my new baby be a citizen of?
Please not be clever or sarcastic, tell us. I am a USA citizen, …………..Is the baby born in France……stay with me artful dodger…is the baby a citizen of France, or of the USA.??
Anyone? He will not answer.