How we will build Trumps Wall.

No! When discussing the 14th it pertained to black slaves who were brought here and born here. When they were freed, they became citizens of the USA, and the purpose of the 14th was to assure that they would be treated as citizens under the jurisdiction of the USA. Jurisdiction of citizenship is one thing, jurisdiction pertaining to law is another. They are not exclusively joined. People on Visa's for educational purposes or to work are still under the jurisdiction (citizenship) or the country they have citizenship in. If they break our laws while visiting we have the authority to hold them responsible for their actions, and then they are deported back to the country of origin that holds jurisdiction over their legal citizenship. This isn't brain surgery, stop trying to make it so complicated.

Been there and done that, pay attention.

 

I have never seen anyone save people like you trying to twist words argue for these special categories of jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction is jurisdiction is jurisdiction. You don't get to just make up a special category. You don't want the children of illegals to be citizens? Get the 14th Amendment repealed.

 

I understand that immigration into the Union is a federal problem since 1808. The several States don't have to care if Jimmy "cracks corn" in their State, especially if he is getting paid for it and spending money and paying taxes that State.

 

It is a financial burden on everybody, and no they do not pay near the taxes as it costs the tax payers for them to be here.

 

Why not create honest Labor of them; not all of them want to stay here but would still like the convenience of being able to participate in our markets.

 

I didn't, that is the actual intent of the 14th, and yes there are already many levels of jurisdiction as I explained. Ignoring facts and the reality of the world around us might be how you muddle through life but it isn't a convenience for those of us actually paying attention. Not sure why am continuing to waste my time but will try one last time;


jurisdiction

Definition
Power or right of a legal or political agency to exercise its authority over a person, subject matter, or (or as in three distinct different things) territory.

Now let us look at the source of the 14th Amendment;

Jurisdiction can take on different meanings that can have nothing to do with physical boundaries alone--and if the framers meant geographical boundaries they would have simply used the term "limits" rather than "jurisdiction" since that was the custom at the time when distinguishing between physical boundaries and reach of law.

Fortunately, we have the highest possible authority on record to answer this question of how the term "jurisdiction" was to be interpreted and applied, the author of the citizenship clause, Sen. Jacob M. Howard (MI) to tell us exactly what it means and its intended scope as he introduced it to the United States Senate in 1866:

I think we are better served to actually apply the original intent, and disregard any further misinterpretations that should have never been forced down the people throat by manipulative bought and paid for judges.

 

I get it.So now it's Trumps Wall
Sounds about right.Trump lives to see his name in huge marquee lights.
Won't be long before that huge - Hollywood - sign is Replaced with the letters :

T-R-U-M-P

 

Subject to jurisdiction in US law is the same as saying "subject to legal authority". Anyone within the bounds of the US is subject to US jurisdiction. There aren't special categories of jurisdiction and more than a century of case law and precedents support that.

 

that is how you know Trump will build the "Trump" wall, he wants to be in the history books huge

 

Pay them fairly and just like in the 80's more will be required to replace them. Criminal employers want them for their cheap/below minimum wage/tax dodging value, and if they can no longer be exploited in that manner, they are of no value to them, and a whole new batch of illegal aliens will be needed. It is never ending unless you stop the misinterpreted anchor baby nonsense, stop the free stuff, and go after the criminal employers just like any other organized criminal enterprise.

 

I just showed you that, that irrational rational is not the case. Different definitions in different context is how the English language works, there is no majority rules in defining a particular word or its meaning, and if providing you with the exact definition from the horses mouth still has you in denial, you are a lost cause.

 

In the context of US law, jurisdiction does not have multiple meanings. There are numerous court cases that back that up.

You want to change the definition, get the 14th Amendment modified or repealed.

 

Again, how arrogant. There are many poor countries in the world no need to turn up your nose at them.

 

There are poor countries that don't have insane crime rates.

 

And? ....

 

And I'm not talking about any of them.

 

Oh, so you are selective about the people you look down at? How nice.

 

Isn't everyone save nihilists?

 

Sorry, but I do not look down on anyone just because they are poof or where they live.

 

Neither am I. You really need to stop lying about me.

 

a market friendly work visa could end that cycle.

 

You are not listening. These criminal employers do not want legal employees. If they did they wouldn't be here to begin with.

 

we have a Commerce Clause; we could be generating revenue from willing participants to our markets. is capitalism really just useless to the right.

 

Having two polar opposing forces known as the two party system literally has created a broken system and the commerce clause is not an exception.

The Commerce Clause refers to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress the power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.”

The Constitution enumerates certain powers for the federal government; the Tenth Amendment provides that any powers that are not enumerated in the Constitution are reserved for the states. Congress has often used the Commerce Clause to justify exercising legislative power over the activities of states and their citizens, leading to significant and ongoing controversy regarding the balance of power between the federal government and the states.

The Commerce Clause has historically been viewed as both a grant of congressional authority and as a restriction on states’ powers to regulate. The “dormant” Commerce Clause refers to the prohibition, implied in the Commerce Clause, against states passing legislation that discriminates against or excessively burdens interstate commerce. The meaning of the word "commerce" is a source of much of the controversy. The Constitution does not explicitly define the word. Some argue that it refers simply to trade or exchange, while others claim that the founders intended to describe more broadly commercial and social intercourse between citizens of different states. Thus, the interpretation of "commerce" affects the appropriate dividing line between federal and state power.

The Commerce Clause has been used to justify the use of federal laws in matters that do not on their face implicate interstate trade or exchange.


Good luck sorting that mess out.

 

We have markets for Labor. Unregulated Labor is affecting interState Commerce, well regulated.

The several States already have a solution; simply Tax individuals from foreign nations, up to Ten dollars to ensure they are lawful to engage in State markets; it is a State's right to sovereign inspection laws regarding Commerce within a sovereign and free State.