Reply With Quote
How do you really know?
Maybe his parents weren't really citizens.
Or their parents.
We have to see all the do entation to be sure, according to your interpretation of the law.
Since one of his parents was a U. S. Citizen at birth, he's not an "anchor baby," he's a U. S. Citizen.
How do you really know?
Maybe his parents weren't really citizens.
Or their parents.
We have to see all the do entation to be sure, according to your interpretation of the law.
One is an immigrant..
the other a Felon
not sure he can stay...
The defendants advance nonfrivolous arguments in support of a different meaning, primarily focusing on the concepts of “allegiance” and “domicile,” the scope of the government’s regulatory “jurisdiction,” the status of Native Americans under the Fourteenth Amendment, and the precedent of Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884), but in the face of an unambiguous cons utional amendment and unambiguous statute, they do 8 Case 1:25-cv-00038-JL-TSM Do ent 79 Filed 02/11/25 Page 9 of 11 not persuade.18 “As our Court of Appeals has stated, ‘genuine ambiguity requires more than a possible alternative construction.’” United States v. Potter, 610 F. Supp. 3d 402, 415 (D.N.H. 2022), aff’d, 78 F.4th 486 (1st Cir. 2023) (quoting United States v. Jimenez, 507 F.3d 13, 21 (1st Cir. 2007)). Nothing in the text, precedent, history, or tradition of the Fourteenth Amendment or § 1401 persuasively suggests any other interpretation than the unambiguous ordinary meaning of “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States advanced by the plaintiffs. Connecticut Nat. Bank v. Germain, 503 U.S. 249, 253–54 (1992) (internal citations and quotations omitted). The plaintiffs have demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits.
“In any event, canons of construction are no more than rules of thumb that help courts determine the meaning of legislation, and in interpreting a statute a court should always turn first to one, cardinal canon before all others. We have stated time and again that courts must presume that a legislature says in a statute what it means and means in a statute what it says there. When the words of a statute are unambiguous, then, this first canon is also the last: judicial inquiry is complete.”
the right has gone so far to the right since 2008 that GWB hardly counts as a Republican anymore
Joseph Normand Laplante - Wikipedia
Yoni said many times W would be on Mount Rushmore.
Yoni doesn't talk about W anymore.
Thank goodness
Yeah, I took him and Cheney off my Christmas Card list a while back.
appreciate the confirmation, fellas
What made you do that?
that y'all are bat radical
Funny how you're all for illegals and have no clue whatsoever about legal immigration. You truly are a ing re !
So far right, yet you and yours align with war mongers like bush and the Cheneys. Glad not to be one of you tbh!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
