US Politics : Open Borders (a continuation)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kieppie said:
Except that the 14th amendment does nor apply to illegal aliens, so no it does not guarantee anything of the sort.
Click to expand...
The Citizenship clause doesn’t consider immigration status. It couldn’t have as the 14th amendment predated federal immigration regulations including immigration status.
 
Kieppie said:
Except that the 14th amendment does nor apply to illegal aliens, so no it does not guarantee anything of the sort.
More accurately it has never been argued in court that it does extend to illegals.
The closest was United States v. Wong Kim Ark all the way back in 1898.
Click to expand...
It literally says: “all persons born in the United States“

Of course it applies.

Or are you trying to argue they are not people?
 
tetrasect said:
It literally says: “all persons born in the United States“

Of course it applies.

Or are you trying to argue they are not people?
Click to expand...
Quick go tell the courts you've settled case law for them with your amateur reading...
I'm sure they're dying to hear from you.
 
Kieppie said:
Quick go tell the courts you've settled case law for them with your amateur reading...
I'm sure they're dying to hear from you.
Click to expand...
Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982) covers equal protection. This Court's prior cases recognizing that illegal aliens are "persons" protected by the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, which Clauses do not include the phrase "within its jurisdiction," cannot be distinguished on the asserted ground that persons who have entered the country illegally are not "within the jurisdiction" of a State even if they are present within its boundaries and subject to its laws. Nor do the logic and history of the Fourteenth Amendment support such a construction. Instead, use of the phrase "within its jurisdiction" confirms the understanding that the Fourteenth Amendment's protection extends to anyone, citizen or stranger, who is subject to the laws of a State, and reaches into every corner of a State's territory.
 
tetrasect said:
At least 55 of the largest corporations in America paid no federal corporate income taxes on their 2020 profits, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

"There’s a bucket of corporate tax breaks that are deliberately in the tax code … . And overall, they cost the federal government roughly $180 billion each year. And for comparison, the corporate tax brings in about $370 billion of revenue a year,” Chye-Ching Huang, executive director of the NYU Tax Law Center

If the tax rate was 35% rather than the 21% due to Trump, and companies didn't get these tax breaks, they would have gotten almost a trillion dollars in revenue instead of $370 billion.

Effective corporate tax rate is at an all time low. Due to tax breaks that enable corporations to get away with paying much less than 21%.

effectiveus.png


The US government should be getting more than triple what they are now.

And don't tell me corporations can't afford it because that's absolute bull.

Companies like Amazon get away with paying only 5% tax while posting profits in the hundreds of billions.
Click to expand...
Corporations employ people and hence lower tax rates employ more people. Look at SA with its high tax rates and% unemployment rate.

USA is doing it right. ANC is not.
 
Naughty little DonDon opened his mouth and said something silly...



Federal prosecutors have obtained an audio recording of a summer 2021 meeting in which former President Donald Trump acknowledges he held onto a classified Pentagon document about a potential attack on Iran, multiple sources told CNN, undercutting his argument that he declassified everything.

The recording indicates Trump understood he retained classified material after leaving the White House, according to multiple sources familiar with the investigation. On the recording, Trump’s comments suggest he would like to share the information but he’s aware of limitations on his ability post-presidency to declassify records, two of the sources said.
 
The_Right_Honourable_Brit said:
Not at all. I just don't see why criminals (illegal immigrants) should be rewarded for their behavior by allowing their offspring to obtain very valuable citizenship when many hard-working and productive people can't.
Click to expand...

Birthright citizenship is not even the norm globally. Only 33 countries do it. Most have restrictions. Just because some women pushes out a baby in a certain country does not mean that baby should be a citizen of that country. Not eve if the mother is there legally on a short-term visa. The citizenship of the child should correspond with the parents.
 
Kieppie said:
Quick go tell the courts you've settled case law for them with your amateur reading...
I'm sure they're dying to hear from you.
Click to expand...
The 14th amentment is a real problem in ending birthright citizenship. You are just blindly repeating conservative talking points without thinking.

The same as leftist who doesn't understand the 2nd Amendment and that "shall not be infringed" actually means shall not be infringed.

The fix is a constitutional amendment or not allowing pregnant women to cross the border and stopping all the other policies that allow anchor babies to bring more family members.

A bad fix will immediately be challenged and be ineffective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X