We are being invaded by a foreign country
20+ million ILLEGAL aliens are in the United States of America.
Right now in the United States of America, ILLEGAL aliens have more rights than you do!

9/26/2010 - HAZELTON, PA - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - IT'S ILLEGAL TO ARREST AN ILLEGAL ALIEN. IT'S ILLEGAL TO ARREST OR PUNISH THOSE WHO HIRE OR RENT TO ILLEGAL ALIENS!!!

Help save America | Say NO to Amnesty | Say NO to obama

"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people." --Theodore Roosevelt

"This nation is in danger of becoming a Third World nightmare with all the corruption, disease, illiteracy, violence and balkanization known all over the world. We need a 10-year moratorium on all immigration to catch our collective breath and we need deportation of over 10 million illegal aliens in a slow and orderly fashion." --Ed Garrison

“The 1987 amnesty was a failure; rather than reducing illegal immigration, it led to an increase,” FAIR stated. “Any new amnesty measure will further weaken respect for our immigration laws. Therefore, all amnesty measures must be defeated.” --Frosty Wooldridge

This is your nation and this is your time to take action.




President barry shits on the United States.

This is a picture of YOUR American president, (president barry soetoro, a.k.a barack obama) refusing to acknowledge the National Anthem of the United States of America. This picture clearly shows barry with his hands crossed across his vaginal area when the United States Anthem was playing.

barry has NO RESPECT for you, me, or America! Not only did he disrespect America, he just shit on the graves of every American Soldier that has died for this country.

6/15/2010 - PRESIDENT BARRY CAN'T EVEN KEEP A U.S. PARK OPEN!!! He gave the park to mexico & the illegal alien mexican drug cartel!!!

7/6/2010 - American President barry soetoro sues AMERICA!!!

9/11/2010 - YOUR president just gave mexico $1 billion dollars for deepwater oil drilling despite his own moratorium on U.S. deepwater drilling!? More proof that barry hates America!

Treason

–noun
1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign. 2. A violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state. 3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

Traitor

–noun
1. a person who betrays another, a cause, or any trust. 2. a person who commits treason by betraying his or her country.




Pslam 109:8

May his days be few; may another take his place of leadership.


barry say's, "our borders are safe."

700 ILLEGAL ALIENS - 40 DAYS - ONE TRAIL


Click here to see 100+ videos just like this.


400 ILLEGAL ALIENS - 35 DAYS - ONE TRAIL

Click here to see 100+ videos just like this.

What's in their backpacks? Are any of them sick with a contagious disease?

United States Code, Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter II, Part VIII, §1325 - "Improper Entry by Alien," any citizen of any country other than the United States who: 1) Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers; or 2) Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or 3) Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact; has committed a federal crime.

Violations are punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment for up to six months. Repeat offenses can bring up to two years in prison. Additional civil fines may be imposed at the discretion of immigration judges, but civil fines do not negate the criminal sanctions or nature of the offense.

ILLEGAL

-ADJ
1. FORBIDDEN BY LAW; UNLAWFUL; ILLICIT 2. UNAUTHORIZED OR PROHIBITED BY A CODE OF OFFICIAL OR ACCEPTED RULES

-N
3. A PERSON WHO HAS ENTERED OR ATTEMPTED TO ENTER A COUNTRY ILLEGALLY

Illegal Alien

–noun
1. a foreigner who has entered or resides in a country unlawfully or without the country's authorization. 2. a foreigner who enters the U.S. without an entry or immigrant visa, esp. a person who crosses the border by avoiding inspection or who overstays the period of time allowed as a visitor, tourist, or businessperson.


ILLEGAL ALIENS DOMINATE THE FBI'S MOST WANTED LIST FOR MURDER

Click here to see the list.


Tuesday, August 24, 2010

WALPIN: 14th Amendment never meant for illegal aliens

The suggestion by at least three senators that the Constitution be amended to deny birthright citizenship to children of illegal aliens born in the United States has induced derogatory retorts that to do so would negate the 14th Amendment's protection of civil rights. Historical facts - ignored by those opposed - in fact demonstrate that such an amendment would reinstate the rule as originally intended by the adoption of the 14th Amendment in 1868.

At issue is the first clause of the 14th Amendment, which states, "All persons born ... in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." As the Supreme Court held in the Slaughterhouse Cases shortly after the adoption of that amendment, the main purpose "was to establish the citizenship of the negro," who, while recently freed in the Civil War, "were still not only not citizens, but were incapable of becoming so by anything short of an amendment to the Constitution." No one has ever suggested that the three civil rights amendments (13th, 14th and 15th) would have been adopted, absent the need to give citizenship and protection to blacks.

Even more relevant, and totally ignored in the current discussion, is that, while the 14th Amendment reads "all persons born in the United States" are citizens, it has never been disputed that "all" never meant "all." In 1873, less than five years after the adoption of the 14th Amendment, the Supreme Court addressed the meaning of that citizenship provision by considering the facts surrounding the adoption of the 14th Amendment, "almost too recent to be called history, but which are familiar to us all." The court concluded, without dissent on this point, that "[t]he phrase, 'subject to its jurisdiction' was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States."

If that had remained the Supreme Court's ruling on this issue, there would be no need for a new amendment to deny citizenship to children of illegal aliens. But more than a quarter-century later - when the members of the Supreme Court no longer claimed personal knowledge of the events leading up to the 14th Amendment - the court, in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, spoke again on this issue. It first reaffirmed that "all" in the 14th Amendment did not mean "all." It recognized exclusions: A child born in the United States to a member of an Indian tribe, or to ministers or consul of a foreign government, or to alien enemies in hostile occupation, was not a U.S. citizen. The reason for these exceptions was that such parents did not owe this country "direct and immediate allegiance."

This later Supreme Court, however, disagreed with the earlier decision holding that a child born to aliens in this country does not have birthright citizenship, at least on the facts presented in that case. At the time of his birth, Mr. Wong's "mother and father were domiciled residents of the United States, and had established and enjoyed a permanent domicile and residence therein ... and were engaged in the prosecution of business." Mr. Wong had, throughout his life, lived in the United States at the family home in Sacramento Calif., leaving only for short visits to China. These facts were the antithesis of current illegal aliens. Given those facts, the court held that Mr. Wong met the requirement of being "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States, and thus sustained his citizenship from birth.

Should that decision necessarily mean that "all" persons born to illegal aliens automatically receive citizenship? It doesn't even discuss illegal aliens (which did not then exist) and thus does not answer that question.

The court, however, sets forth two conditions that, if existent, warrant providing citizenship to children of aliens: "allegiance" and "ligeance." For example, American Indians were excluded from birthright citizenship, because they were held to owe allegiance to their tribes, not to the United States. Ligeance, for those unfamiliar with that old English term, is the "connection between sovereign and subject by which they were mutually bound, the former to protection and the securing of justice, the latter to faithful service."

A bill just introduced in the Texas Legislature by Rep. Leo Berman prohibiting the issuance of a birth certificate to a newborn child of an illegal alien - if enacted - would undoubtedly make it necessary for the Supreme Court to decide which of its two 19th-century holdings on the meaning of the citizenship provision in the 14th Amendment is the correct one as related to children of illegal aliens.

That issue would be presented by a lawsuit by such child to require issuance of the birth certificate and for a declaration of the unconstitutionality of the law. The court would then have to consider whether an illegal alien meets the requisite requirements of allegiance and ligeance to have truly placed himself "subject to the jurisdiction of" this country's government. How would that be possible given the alien's violation of this country's laws by entering and remaining? Isn't violation of law, by definition, inconsistent with allegiance and, particularly, faithful service to this country?

Unless that statute is enacted in Texas or another state, this issue cannot readily be presented to the Supreme Court because of a judicial prerequisite to hearing a case that requires the plaintiff to have "standing" - a personal interest. It is doubtful that any interested taxpayer would have standing to object to issuance of a birth certificate, documenting a claim of citizenship by a child of an illegal alien. Hence, absent a case challenging a state's refusal to issue a birth certificate, the courts could only rule on it if and when the government itself were to raise this issue in the courts - unlikely, at least with the current administration.

Thus, without state action on the subject, the only practical way to return to the original intent of the 14th Amendment would be through a new constitutional amendment. Beyond that, these facts demonstrate that those seeking to return to that original intent should not be castigated for supposedly seeking to emasculate the 14th Amendment; they are not.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/24/14th-amendment-never-meant-for-illegals/

No comments:

Post a Comment