Message from @SantaSoc

Discord ID: 508748261616779274


2018-11-04 20:57:47 UTC  

boot them across the border. they aren't our responsibility. we have no obligation to pay for them.

2018-11-04 20:57:48 UTC  

Then you're agreeing with me. We cannot legally prosecute a Honduran for murder?

2018-11-04 20:57:59 UTC  

Just send them home with our thanks?

2018-11-04 20:58:12 UTC  

i don't care to prosecute them. violent invaders should be shot.

2018-11-04 20:58:48 UTC  

So we should declare war on Honduras?

2018-11-04 20:58:50 UTC  

if you come here illegaly you arnt deserving of the same protections

2018-11-04 20:58:53 UTC  

you're taking a legalistic stance. i don't really give a fuck about that. i just want them out.

2018-11-04 20:59:05 UTC  

i don't really care how illegals are removed.

2018-11-04 20:59:14 UTC  

so long as they are removed.

2018-11-04 20:59:57 UTC  

```Then you're agreeing with me. We cannot legally prosecute a Honduran for murder?
Just send them home with our thanks?```
No, they don't have constitutional rights because they don't apply to the laws of the US of A!

2018-11-04 21:00:16 UTC  

they are illegal. not citizens, not residents, not visitors. no legal status whatsoever. they should not be here. that they are here is due to litigious shit like what you're spouting right now. i do not care that honduras is shit. i do not care that they're coming to seek a better life. none of this matters. what matters is that they GTFO.

2018-11-04 21:00:35 UTC  

The law exists to protect us all. We must always be vigilant when we decide to disregard safeguards to abuse. The 14th was necessary specifically because of prior abuse.

2018-11-04 21:01:08 UTC  

yes and it would be wrong to take it from citizens

2018-11-04 21:01:16 UTC  

these people are not american citizens. they are not legal residents or visitors with valid visas. they shouldn't get any constitutional rights.

2018-11-04 21:01:21 UTC  

illegals arnt citizans

2018-11-04 21:02:14 UTC  

Okay. If laws are created to clearly state the illegals are outside our laws and the only recourse for any crime they commit is to deport them, then I will agree that is sound reasoning to say the 14th does not apply.

2018-11-04 21:02:19 UTC  

otherwise you end up in this retarded scenario where the ENTIRE PLANET has US constitutional rights because they might one day cross the border illegally. people in the fucking caravans in mexico are claiming that their constitutional rights are being violated.

2018-11-04 21:02:59 UTC  

@DrYuriMom i would appreciate if you would join us in voice chat, apparently dante recommends your intelectual value.

2018-11-04 21:03:08 UTC  

i will agree to your compromise on the condition that violent offenders can be shot on sight.

2018-11-04 21:03:40 UTC  

I'm not in a position to voice chat right now. At work waiting for someone else to get something done. Sorry.

2018-11-04 21:03:57 UTC  

Not a problem.

2018-11-04 21:04:29 UTC  

But Atkins, that would place them under our jurisdiction unless we were at war with their nation and we determined them to be spies.

2018-11-04 21:05:20 UTC  

Okay, work calls. Ttfn

2018-11-04 21:06:13 UTC  

Are bears or mountain lions under American jurisdiction? Or unconquered tribes?

2018-11-04 21:06:30 UTC  

They can still be shot.

2018-11-04 21:10:48 UTC  

if you use subjet to the laws of a nation does that mean any one born at a us embassy deserves citizenship, or since international corporations are subject to us jurisdiction and those employees are subject to the company does that by extension grant them rights.

2018-11-04 23:40:38 UTC  

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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. -14th Amendement
Clearly this does not mean subject to laws or paying taxes alone. If that were the case every foreign resident and visitor would be a citizen.
When the 14th was written it was clarified shortly after by a senator who said "Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."

2018-11-04 23:40:47 UTC  

Bears and mountain lions are not human and therefore not relevant. The 14th Amendment clear relates to persons and therefore the company comment is not relevant.

2018-11-04 23:43:30 UTC  

During the debates the topic of a "Chinaman" was discussed and it was stated that YES, children born to such people would be citizens

2018-11-04 23:43:42 UTC  

That was later part of the 1898 Supreme Court case

2018-11-04 23:44:03 UTC  

In 1884 the supreme court ruled that newly born indians were not covered under the 14th amendment because their parents were not American citizens. This caused congress to pass the Citizen Act in 1924 (amazing speed i know) and formally provide all tribal members/descendants.

2018-11-04 23:44:07 UTC  

Again, someone who was as foreign and unwanted as you get at the time was considered covered by the 14th

2018-11-04 23:45:31 UTC  

The Indian case was based on an argument that by treaty the Indian nations were sovereign

2018-11-04 23:46:01 UTC  

Because they really had no ability to operate as real nations that was a ridiculous argument and was resolved in 1924 as you say

2018-11-04 23:46:03 UTC  

The government granted foreigners the same equality protection that the 14th provides. However it does not consider them citizens in the common use of the word.

2018-11-04 23:46:58 UTC  

The children born under the 14th are considered citizens by the 14th as validated by the Supreme Court in 1898 and then supported by precedent ever since.

2018-11-04 23:47:54 UTC  

And, honestly, by the debate in the Congress at the time when some tried to use prejudice against Chinese laborers against the amendment, especially in California

2018-11-04 23:51:57 UTC  

Right and his parents had legally entered the country

2018-11-04 23:53:30 UTC  

If they want to grant it to the children of legal residents and entrants that will be ok

2018-11-04 23:54:42 UTC  

Visa overstays and vacation births are another issue to be addressed and it is far easier to argue that they should have citizen children than those who enter illegally

2018-11-04 23:57:20 UTC  

The ruling of 1898 doesnt apply when discussing illegal immigrants. The citizenship of their children has been granted following a broad interpretation of the 14th amendment.