On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, the one that says:

"???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."

You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if
he does ever read it, he won't understand it.

Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of
the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was
on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of
times since then. The question is whether an "illegal" who is here
under a false identity or living in the underground economy and
unknown to the government is really under their jurisdiction. I agree
it is really fine slicing the words but there have been constitutional
cases land at the SCOTUS with less.
It is like the world series, I really do not have a dog in the fight,
I am not really watching but I will look to see it came out.
Maybe they should have been asking Kavanaugh more about immigration
than whether he groped a girl when he was a teenager.

wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, the one that says:

"???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."

You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if
he does ever read it, he won't understand it.

Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of
the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was
on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of
times since then. The question is whether an "illegal" who is here
under a false identity or living in the underground economy and
unknown to the government is really under their jurisdiction. I agree
it is really fine slicing the words but there have been constitutional
cases land at the SCOTUS with less.
It is like the world series, I really do not have a dog in the fight,
I am not really watching but I will look to see it came out.
Maybe they should have been asking Kavanaugh more about immigration
than whether he groped a girl when he was a teenager.


As Harry states, words have meaning.

On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, the one that says:

"???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."

You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if
he does ever read it, he won't understand it.

Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of
the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was
on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of
times since then.

Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order?

You consistently miss the forest to bite on a tree.

On 10/31/2018 6:43 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, theÂ* one that says:

"???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."

You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if
heÂ* does ever read it, heÂ* won't understand it.

Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of
the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was
on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of
times since then.


Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order?



No, but Senator Harry Reid argued against birthright citizenship
until Nancy Pelosi hit him upside the head.

On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, the one that says:

"???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."

You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if
he does ever read it, he won't understand it.

Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of
the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was
on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of
times since then.

Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order?

You consistently miss the forest to bite on a tree.

Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but
there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having
today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean?
If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written
a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they
haven't.
Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in
the SCOTUS decide.

On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, the one that says:

"???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."

You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if
he does ever read it, he won't understand it.

Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of
the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was
on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of
times since then.

Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order?

You consistently miss the forest to bite on a tree.

Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but
there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having
today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean?
If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written
a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they
haven't.
Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in
the SCOTUS decide.



I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took
up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear.

On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 13:07:32 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, the one that says:

"???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."

You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if
he does ever read it, he won't understand it.

Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of
the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was
on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of
times since then.

Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order?

You consistently miss the forest to bite on a tree.

Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but
there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having
today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean?
If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written
a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they
haven't.
Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in
the SCOTUS decide.



I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took
up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear.

The first sentence of the 1st amendment is pretty clear too but the
interpretation is more far ranging so who knows what the courts might
make of it.
Realistically this is a question for the legislature, that has the
responsibility to "To establish an uniform rule of naturalization"
Section 8 (4)
They are the ones who made up the law that says any child of a
citizen is a citizen. The Constitution is silent on that. It certainly
makes sense that they could more narrowly define what the 14th
amendment is saying, much like you want them to define what the 2d
amendment says.
We let the courts run amok with the 1st amendment and you see where
that ended up. KOCHPAC is now a "person" with full 1st amendment
rights.

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, the one that says:

"???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."

You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if
he does ever read it, he won't understand it.

Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of
the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was
on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of
times since then.

Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order?

You consistently miss the forest to bite on a tree.

Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but
there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having
today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean?
If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written
a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they
haven't.
Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in
the SCOTUS decide.



I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took
up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear.


Yes, very clear. And the illegals are they under the jurisdiction? The
courts do not take it, the executive order stands. Hope you survive the
apoplexy.

On 10/31/18 1:53 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, the one that says:

"???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."

You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution and if
he does ever read it, he won't understand it.

Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the jurisdiction of
the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton was
on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of
times since then.

Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order?

You consistently miss the forest to bite on a tree.

Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but
there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having
today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean?
If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written
a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they
haven't.
Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in
the SCOTUS decide.



I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took
up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear.


Yes, very clear. And the illegals are they under the jurisdiction? The
courts do not take it, the executive order stands. Hope you survive the
apoplexy.


Oh, if Pig Vomit promulgates it, an immediate suit will be filed
against it, the court will rule against Pig Vomit, and the higher
courts will let the ruling stand.

On 10/31/2018 1:57 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/31/18 1:53 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/31/18 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 06:43:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 10/30/18 10:09 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 15:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

POTUS Pig Vomit wants to kill the 14th Amendment, theÂ* one that
says:

"???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."

You just know that Orange Asshole has never read the Constitution
and if
heÂ* does ever read it, heÂ* won't understand it.

Trump is not the first one to question what "Under the
jurisdiction of
the US" really means. I heard it discussed in the 90s when Clinton
was
on the anti immigration bandwagon and it has popped up a number of
times since then.

Did Clinton suggest abrogating the 14th via Executive Order?

You consistently miss the forest toÂ* bite on a tree.

Maybe not Clinton personally (I never heard him say either way) but
there was a lot of discussion about the same question we are having
today. What does "under the jurisdiction" really mean?
If we did not have such a feckless legislature they would have written
a decent immigration bill sometime in the last 80 years but they
haven't.
Unfortunately in their absence it will come down to what 5 people in
the SCOTUS decide.



I'd be surprised if the lower federal courts or the Supremes even took
up the case. The first sentence of the article is perfectly clear.


Yes, very clear.Â*Â* And the illegals are they under the jurisdiction?Â* The
courts do not take it, the executive order stands.Â* Hope you survive the
apoplexy.


Oh, if Pig Vomit promulgates it, anÂ* immediateÂ* suitÂ* will be filed
againstÂ* it, theÂ* courtÂ* will rule against Pig Vomit,Â* andÂ* the higher
courtsÂ* will let theÂ* ruling stand.


This whole matter has never been tested in a court including the SCOTUS.
New territory. Step one in getting the 14th clarified
is to do exactly what Trump is threatening to do since congress members
just sit on their hands trying to look pretty without taking a position
that may cost them a vote.