Rudy Canoza wrote in
news:g4GdndRwoZ35MKzUnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@earthlink.com:
> Mitchell Holman wrote:
>> Rudy Canoza wrote in
>> news:xN6dnbznzaVH4qzUnZ2dnUVZ_rTinZ2d@earthlink.com:
>>
>>> Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote in
>>>> news:96udnRTJkfsevK3UnZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@earthlink.com:
>>>>
>>>>> Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote in
>>>>>> news:Ys6dnSbEltf5QrPUnZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@earthlink.com:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:admdnd3k18XUV7PUnZ2dnUVZ_o_inZ2d@earthlink.com:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> news:O9WdnfTsw_CymbPUnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@earthlink.com:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Timothy Crowley wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 24, 9:41 pm, strabo wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> \
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What we have here are Communists like Crowley who will
support
>>>>>>>>>>>>> any anti-American measure,
>>>>>>>>>>>> eat FACTS you racist liar:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> subject to the jurisdiction thereof,
>>>>>>>>>>> You don't know what "subject to the jurisdiction" means,
>>>>>>>>>>> cunthair.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Actually, by now, you *do* know, and you know it does not mean
>>>>>>>>>>> merely having to follow the laws. It means much more than
that:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>> means owing full and exclusive allegiance to the U.S.,
something
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> children of aliens do not.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Who do you owe allegiance to, and why?
>>>>>>>>> The U.S., .wit, because I'm a citizen of the U.S.
>>>>>>>> Because you were born in the US, just like
>>>>>>>> the anchor babies you hate.
>>>>>>> No, *not* merely because I was born here. Being born here, by
>>>>>>> itself, is *not* what creates the allegiance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The 14th Amendment says nothing about "allegience"
>>>>> It doesn't say anything about having to obey the laws, either, you
>>>>> .wit. But "subject to the jurisdiction" *means* owing full and
>>>>> exclusive allegiance to the country. We know this beyond dispute:
>>>>> the Senators who wrote the amendment said that's what it means.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's why there is a separate
>>>>>>> phrase, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof", in the
>>>>>>> citizenship clause.
>>>>>> Everyone except diplomats are "subject to the jurisdiction"
>>>>>> of the US.
>>>>> You're deliberately pretending the phrase means something other than
>>>>> what it means.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Subject to the jurisdiction" does not mean being subject to the
laws;
>>>>> it means owing full and exclusive allegiance.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [snip bullshit and entirely *INAPPLICABLE* dictionary definition]
>>>>
>>
Rudy hangs is whole argument argument on the meaning of
"jurisdiction" but can't handle the textbook definition of it
because it proves him wrong.
>>
>>
>> Rudy proven wrong
>
> See other post.
Snippage noted.
>
>
>>>
>>> You mean all those American-born children of refugees
>>> from Cuba and Haiti and Vietnam aren't really citizens?
>>> When do you want to deport THEM to a country they have
>>> never been to?
>>
>
>
>
More crickets.
>
>
>>>>>>>>> The phrase, "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" that appears in
>>>>>>>>> the citizenship clause, *means* owing full and exclusive
>>>>>>>>> jurisdiction to the U.S. That's what the authors of the
amendment
>>>>>>>>> said it means, and that's what the Supreme Court, in two cases
>>>>>>>>> following ratification, specifically acknowledged the legislative
>>>>>>>>> intent of the phrase to be. Not only that, but they specifically
>>>>>>>>> acknowledged that it does *NOT* mean merely subject to the laws.
>>>>>>>> Why do you hate patriotic medal-winning Americans?
>>>>>>> Stupid asshole's question; disregarded.
>>>>>> Should Henry Cejudo be deported to a country
>>>>>> he has never been to?
>>>>> Stupid asshole's question; disregarded.
>>>>>
>>>>> He isn't a citizen.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> He was born in the US, works in the US, and
>>>> holds a US passport.
>>> Doesn't make him a citizen. He is a presumed citizen.
>>
>>
>> Huh?
>>
>> What is "presumed citizen"?
>
> See Justice Scalia's dissent in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld for an elaboration.
Dissents are not law.
|