Ariz. lawmakers mull automatic citizenship bill

Associated Press ^ | Feb. 7, 2011 | JACQUES BILLEAUD

[Free ThinkerNY]

PHOENIX (AP) -- Arizona lawmakers are holding a hearing on a bill that challenges automatic U.S. citizenship for children of illegal immigrants.

The bill to be heard Monday by the Senate judiciary committee provides a definition of a citizen of Arizona as a person who was born or naturalized in the United States and lives legally in Arizona.

[Red Steel]

And if my aunt had balls, she’d be my uncle. You can interpret or parse anyway you choose, but it won’t alter the facts, nor the definition of “jurisdiction”.

It's not parsed at all. It means exactly what I said it means.

[raybbr]

Your statement illustrates your belief that illegal aliens are subject to jurisdiction.

Can the invaders vote? Are they required, by law, to pay taxes? If so, how without a SS#?

Jurisdiction doesn't mean what you think vis-a-vis the 14th Amendment.

Clearly you have a stake in providing these invaders citizenship. Care to tell us what that is?

[stormer]

Good grief - is there none among you who understand English? Jurisdiction (from the Latin ius, iuris meaning “oath” and dicere meaning “to speak”) is the practical authority granted to a formally constituted legal body or to a political leader to deal with and make pronouncements on legal matters and, by implication, to administer justice within a defined area of responsibility.

[Red Steel]

To Stormer - Jurisdiction doesn't mean what you think vis-a-vis the 14th Amendment.

Clearly you have a stake in providing these invaders citizenship. Care to tell us what that is?

Hey Dem Stormer. So what is your problem care to say? The US Supreme Court in 1873 understood English very well and they understood the meaning to those words that you have trouble understanding:

"Mr. Justice MILLER, now, April 14th, 1873, delivered the opinion of the court. ...

To remove this difficulty primarily, and to establish clear and comprehensive definition of citizenship which should declare what should constitute citizenship of the

United States and also citizenship of a State, the first clause of the first section was framed.

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

The first observation we have to make on this clause is that it puts at rest both the questions which we stated to have been the subject of differences of opinion. It declares that persons may be citizens of the United States without regard to their citizenship of a particular State, and it overturns the Dred Scott decision by making all persons born within the United States and subject to its jurisdiction citizens of the United States. That its main purpose was to establish the citizenship of the negro can admit of no doubt. The 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."

To repeat the words again to the uncouth and deaf here:

"The 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.""

The meaning and intent to these words above have always been clear as day, even to Justice Horrace Gray in 1898 that he ignored.

[Dante3]

I hope it passes.

[Dante3]

If it does pass, there will be the problem of judges rejecting and making laws. An outrageous example of a judge running amok is the action of Judge Dean S. Worcester blatantly defying the Virginia Supreme Court merely because he did not like their ruling and is in a frenzy to assist illegal aliens and undesirable immigrants. (See The Washington Post, Feb. 6, 2011)