TEOTWAWKI inc.
.338 Win Mag
Biden's bones would have turned to dust.
Comes down to a debate about what "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means.
I'm with you on that, I think if your parents can be prosecuted for a crime, that means they are subject to the jurisdiction of the federal government.
But I can see the argument that someone who is here illegally or even a fugitive from justice doesn't qualify.
If the kid was born on US soil, then yes. It's not so much about whether the parent can be charged, but the kid.So, if a Japanese guy came here with his kids on vacation, and he committed a crime, was charged and convicted, his child can be a citizen?
If he puts gas cans on that list, I'll carve him into Mt. Rushmore myself!!!Make Lightbulbs Great Again!
- President Trump’s energy actions empower consumer choice in vehicles, showerheads, toilets, washing machines, lightbulbs and dishwashers.
I sincerely hope the fellow man of these folks that got fucked over by law-fair and abuse from the DOJ at the behest of the former President...many have lost everything or damn near to it, and it's past time for US to quit taking care of the ungrateful fucks in other Countries and make our own whole or at least back to where they can start building their lives back.Trump issues 1,500 broad pardons for Jan. 6 defendants: ‘Going to release our great hostages’
Trump signed about 1,500 pardons after returning to the White House from a day of inaugural festivities.nypost.com
WASHINGTON — President Trump issued pardons Monday night for participants in the 2021 Capitol riot — staying true to his promise to grant clemency to people involved in halting the counting of Electoral College votes on Jan. 6, 2021.
1:15 video
Trump signs pardons for Jan. 6 defendants
Trump signs pardons for Jan. 6 defendantscdn.jwplayer.com
Still not as bad as the videos they posted of the grieving mothers at the funerals of their kids killed by illegals. Oh wait... they never posted those videos.The man is keeping his word!
Job Done!! When Trump signed that. He handed it back and said get that where it needs to be now.Trump issues 1,500 broad pardons for Jan. 6 defendants: ‘Going to release our great hostages’
Trump signed about 1,500 pardons after returning to the White House from a day of inaugural festivities.nypost.com
WASHINGTON — President Trump issued pardons Monday night for participants in the 2021 Capitol riot — staying true to his promise to grant clemency to people involved in halting the counting of Electoral College votes on Jan. 6, 2021.
1:15 video
Trump signs pardons for Jan. 6 defendants
Trump signs pardons for Jan. 6 defendantscdn.jwplayer.com
Sure it is, I highlighted it in the text you quoted:That's not in the text.
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.
copy and past from AI generated query:Trump to Declare National Energy Emergency
“National security is a key issue here.”vigilantnews.com
Diplomatic immunity does mean you cannot be arrested.Sure it is, I highlighted it in the text you quoted:
That said, I recognize that you're probably saying that the interpretation I posted is not in the text. Yes, that's kind of how law works. It gets written, then it gets interpreted. What does "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" mean, specifically in the context of when the 14th amendment was created? I think it's clear that it doesn't mean "any person who can be arrested for committing a crime," as that would include everyone - even diplomatic immunity has its limitations.
It's like the second amendment. What do "Arms" mean? We have to interpret that, ideally in the context of when the 2nd amendment was created. The interpretation I think most valid is "weapons commonly carried by a soldier of his time." Which would be muskets way back when, and today would be full auto and RPGs, but not nukes.
It's unfortunate, but laws are incorrectly interpreted all the time. What was it, just two years ago that we finally decided that the right to bear arms is not restricted to private property?