Trump: If President, I'll Deport *All* Undocumented Immigrants

It is not my fault you do not understand it in its entirety. So you chose to look a a few words in it and run with it...

 

I agree with everything you've said except for the part about granting amnesty simply because these illegals have had "anchor babies" on American soil. If people are in this country illegally, that should not (NOT) mean that any offspring they have on American soil automatically become American citizens. It's all a moot point, though, because nobody is ever really going to actually DO anything about illegals pouring in here anyway.

And I believe you accurately described why these crimes will continue -- American businessmen! If after the last "amnesty" we had put strict laws into place mandating minimum prison sentences and heavy fines for any American citizen who employs illegal aliens without going through the proper procedures, we never would have had a problem afterward.

Please understand, a lot of native Westerners and Southwesterners (like me) have nothing in the world against Mexican people. They are some of the hardest-working, most decent people you will ever know. We have an immigration process in place -- why the hell don't we enforce it?! We have a "green card" guest-worker program in place, complete with visas -- why the hell don't we enforce the rules surrounding it?!

The cruel irony now is that with the falling birth rate in America, we need to have these imported workers to get anything done in the quantities needed! That applies to everything from construction to rocket science. If you doubt it, think back on the last time you tried to get a typical "Millennial" (or younger) to do anything that didn't involve smartphones, Facebook, or playing computer games.

"Darling, you've got to learn to DO SOMETHING, or you never will have anything but "issues"...."

 

Its a perversion of the law, intended to guarantee former slaves were considered citizens.

 

People working the fields make minimum wage and more, many as much as $20 per hour. How could I not be aware of illegals working the fields too, did I not tell you that the majority are legal workers? Deny what report? Legal immigrants are too expensive? Why then are the majority of AG workers legal and citizen? Your claim is fallacy. The issue with AG is that it is limited work and one must travel to the next location, harvests are usually 3 - 6 weeks then off to the next location which could be in another county or state. Citizens can't travel like that and want work where they live, citizens don't want to be nomads.

 

Look here?

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-b...984-illegal-immigrants-benefit-the-us-economy

 

As I understand, it's Mr. Trump and probably most of the other Republican candidates would like to deny birthright citizenship to kids born of illegals. But they can't, or at least they think they can't. Now, why don't you be a good little soldier and inform all of them that if only they understood what you do, it would be ever so simple to do so. I'm sure you'll be featured at the Republican convention next year as the man who led the party out of the darkness and solved one of their most vexing issues. I'm also sure Trump would be more than happy to spend a few mil to run this by the courts in the next few months. Think of it - you'll be famous. Wouldn't that be wonderful? Ever wonder why no one's ever done it?

 

And it says what exactly? That illegals are important to the U.S. economy, as well as vital to certain industries like agriculture. Is this not what was just said? It then makes the claim that certain segments are entirely dependent on illegals like AG. So how can that be if the majority of AG workers are actually legal immigrants and citizens.

Here is what he claims

Does the bolded not completely contradict each other, especially since they are one right after the other?

This is not a report, it is an opinion piece of a person advocating for something based on his own picked info and contradicting himself in the very next sentence.

 

I could care less about Trump nor your comments about me. You simply were wrong and now you are running from your claims trying to bait... Not going to happen.

 

Oh, please. Anyone (with certain specific exceptions in the law) born on U.S. soil IS a U.S. citizen. Settled law since 1898. No if's, and's, but's or maybe's. If that were not so, then there would be no need to eliminate or change the 'birthright citizen' ruling. You may continue to assert that I am wrong, but I regret to inform you that is simply not correct. That you have chosen to drink whatever nonsense Kool-Aid the whackjobs on the right have given you is something you will have to wrestle with, as I have no more time to do so.

 

Yes the Amendment is used and its intent is misused. It has nothing to do what you keep bringing up.

I am using logic and facts. Has nothing to do with the "right" or "left". Keep in mind respectful debate Grizz. Your last sentence was completely unwarranted. Drop the bias and post.

 

There is no mention of slaves anywhere in the 14th amendment. The words "all persons" is though.

 

Trump can certainly try. But even if he succeeds he'll just be shooting himself in the foot, I bet most of his businesses, or at least the contractors they work with uses cheap ILLegal immigrant labor.

 

And the 14th is merely declaratory of existing law, i.e. the 1866 CRA. The phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" is there, too. Do you know what "amity" means yet?

 

Both refuted here.......http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=407716&p=1065006608#post1065006608

 

Nobody is trying to change the ruling in WKA, BRC to illegals has not been settled since 1898, it's a fairly recent issue. You have been shown more than once that the WKA decision does not merit out what you are claiming it does.

- - - Updated - - -

And the 14th is merely declaratory of existing law, i.e. the 1866 CRA. The phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" is there, too. Do you know what "amity" means yet?

 

Don't let anyone be fooled. No way to deport 10s of millions. Impossible. But you can create a situation which they will self deport. Make it a felony for a business to employ an illegal. Problem solved, with self deportation of most of them.

But do not be fooled. Since this is the only thing that will actually deport them, and keep more from coming, IT WILL NEVER BE USED.

And that is all you really need to know. The TRUTH. So get your heads out cha arses, and recognize FACTS.

I am getting sick of this game playing.

 

You've tried to peddle right wing nonsense about birthright citizenship in the United States, and particularly in regard to the Wong Kim Ark case. However, nowhere have you responded, with legal citations, to the decision in WKA, the effective part of it below (emphasis mine):

The evident intention, and the necessary effect, of the submission of this case to the decision of the court upon the facts agreed by the parties were to present for determination the single question stated at the beginning of this opinion, namely, whether a child born in the United States, of parent of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States. For the reasons above stated, this court is of opinion that the question must be answered in the affirmative..

Despite who WKA was or the circumstances of how his case got to the Supreme Court, their decision was about as clear as you can get. Via the 14th Amendment, their decision was that any child born in this country (certain limited exceptions noted), is granted U.S. citizenship. And it doesn't matter one little bit if your parents are here legally or illegally.

 

Nowhere have I responded with legal citations? Is not the quoting of the case legal citation? Are you so truly inept that you don't then recognize the ruling as being legal citation?

Let me highlight the portion you seem to be leaving out that shows the parents to be here domciled and resident. I've peddled nothing, all I have done was point out your misguided and cherry picked phrases showing that you are not being intellectually honest with your diatribe. Your bolding of those specific phrases doesn't change the fact that his parents were here with a permanent domicil and residence in the US. No illegal immigrant has a permanent domicil in the us nor are they legally resident here. Grays opinion was that any child born to parents who are permanently domiciled and resident in the US, was a citizen at birth.

You continue to project onto the ruling more than what it actually does.

 

Not just businesses, but individuals as well. This is the best way to handle the situation. Do away with the incentive, and they have no reason to enter illegally. Until we get serious and deal with this issue in this manner, they will keep coming no matter what.

And that is the truth. The government in no way will ever do anything like this to business. They get too many donations from business since Citizens United. And they will never go after businesses in this manner. NEVER. That's why you saw Bush wanting to implement a guest worker program.

Me too. We have the answer, so we should use it. And again, I'm a liberal. I have no problem with this idea at all. Why aren't cons getting on board with this?

But one things for certain, Donald Trump can't deport all illegals. It's simply not possible. He can say anything he wants, but he can't make it happen.

 

This only refers to children of LEGAL RESIDENTS of this country that are not here on diplomatic missions. The part about the exception of the children of diplomats not being granted citizenship should show you that ONLY the children of LEGAL RESIDENTS are being discussed.
Thanks for the citation. It's easy to destroy your arguments with your own evidence.

The children of illegals should be deported as illegals.

 

All of the contractors will have to comply with E-verify. It's a wash on competitive balance if everybody has to play by the same rules.

 

I can do no more than post, and highlight, the clear language of a decision which as stood for 117 years. I will also point out that if your interpretation was correct (which it most definitely is NOT), then it would be quite simple to deport those "non-citizens" born here.

Go read the entire decision. Learn something. Like, why you're wrong.

Your uninformed opinion and reality are at opposite poles.

 

For those who do not "believe" that the 14th Amendment and the Wong Kim Ark decision granted citizenship to anyone born in this country, let me ask this - how exactly would you prove you are a citizen when your birth certificate is not sufficient?

I ask this because the good state of Georgia, like many other misled Republican states, in order to keep those hordes of illegals from voting, requires me to bring my drivers license (with picture) when I vote. Fine. No problem. Well, now it's time to renew my license. Among other documents requires is a certified birth certificate. OK, no problem, but it only shows the date & place of birth, parents' names, but only their names, not whether or not they were natural born citizens of this country or legal immigrants. Ooooh- that could be a problem. I mean, if Republicans were somehow able to pass into law that being born here does not automatically guarantee citizenship, then what? Will we also be required to have copies of our parents' birth certificates as well? and how far back will we have to go to "prove" that there wasn't an illegal in the line? Have fun, y'all.

 

Children are a protected class. Plyler v Doe. It is only policy that says children born of illegals are born citizens. 7FAM1100 Except you didn't highlight the "clear" language, you cherry picked your highlight and dismiss the rest so as to attempt to make it fit with your claim.

I have read it, I have questioned you on it and you never responded back, I wonder why that is? Maybe you should try learning something by answering my questions that I posed to you in the prior comments.

Your opinion isn't that all informed, nor is your ability to cipher actual case rulings.

 

A BC is merely evidence of birth. You, as a child would be under your parents "hand" and they would provide the rest of the evidence, i.e. their passport or other required documents. It is then up to the DoS to either grant a US Passport or not.

A drivers license is a privilege not a right and is regulated by the state issuing it. You don't have to be a citizen to obtain a DL.

Proving ones ancestry isn't so hard, their are ships logs and federal registries along with state registries of all people since 1606. The DoS even accepts bibles with family history written in them showing the births of children throughout a families history.