Subject to the jurisdiction thereof

[DrewPaul]

A secure border will do nothing to stop the majority of illegal immigration.

Are you interested in stopping illegal immigration?

 

[NolanVoyd]

Its a deterrent and it does deter and make crossing more difficult. Why do you think they cross where there is no wall.

It doesn't deter shit.

You are clueless.

Despite claiming so continually the last administration made little attempt to secure or close the border.



If Trump can as much as possible close and secure the border

Biden secured the border way more than trump did.

apprehensions and expulsions were up over the Trump years and migrants were more likely to be released by the Trump admin than the biden adnin.

you just got lied to and fell for it.

Data Show Migrants Were More Likely to Be Released by Trump Than Biden​

https://www.cato.org/blog/new-data-show-migrants-were-more-likely-be-released-trump-biden

and after he deports the criminals he could offer a pathway to citizenship to people who have already assimilated for many years. Some on the right wouldn't like it but he may get enough support from the left. Trumps not an ideologue he's a deal maker and problem solver.

The democrats have been pushing for that, for a path to citizenship, for decades.

The right ALWAYS blocks it.

Stop repeating lies.

It can be done quicker than that. No longer allow a write off on taxes from paying illegal workers.

lie.

Companies depend on being able to write off that expenditure. If they can't it won't be worth hiring them.

No, clueless. There is no such thing.

You are clueless.

 

[Questerr]

Are you interested in stopping illegal immigration?

Yep. By going directly to the cause: our legal immigration being too expensive and impossible to obtain for most people who would want to immigrate. Unless you do something about that, you will do nothing to stop illegal immigration.

 

[DrewPaul]

Yep. By going directly to the cause: our legal immigration being too expensive and impossible to obtain for most people who would want to immigrate. Unless you do something about that, you will do nothing to stop illegal immigration.

A million people a year manage it somehow. But I'm in favor of streamlining the process and set the goal for 2 million a year. Also give citizenship to people willing to do a hitch in the service.

 

[Questerr]

A million people a year manage it somehow. But I'm in favor of streamlining the process and set the goal for 2 million a year. Also give citizenship to people willing to do a hitch in the service.

That’s already a thing but they have to legally emigrate first.

You realize that it’s functionally impossible to legally emigrate to the US without a workplace sponsor, a education sponsor, a doctoral level expertise in something, or a close family member already living in the US, yes?

 

[DrewPaul]

It doesn't deter shit.

Of course it does. Have you seen where they have built the wall? You think you can get over it? Gonna bring a 20ft ladder with you?

Biden secured the border way more than trump did.

Obviously you go by a different set of reality. Let me know if you land back on earth.

 

[NolanVoyd]

Of course it does.

no it doesnt.

Have you seen where they have built the wall? You think you can get over it? Gonna bring a 20ft ladder with you?

No need. It gets cut with torches, dug under, etc.

Obviously you go by a different set of reality. Let me know if you land back on earth.

Facts.

Biden secured the border way more than trump did.

apprehensions and expulsions were up over the Trump years and migrants were more likely to be released by the Trump admin than the biden adnin.

you just got lied to and fell for it.

Data Show Migrants Were More Likely to Be Released by Trump Than Biden​

https://www.cato.org/blog/new-data-show-migrants-were-more-likely-be-released-trump-biden

 

[DrewPaul]

no it doesnt.

No need. It gets cut with torches, dug under, etc.

Ridiculous. Sure they'll bring torches, acetylene tanks all the tubing, the blow torch and carry it all on their backs over 100's of miles. Of course no one will notice it as it takes them hours to cut through. The fence is buried 5 feet under ground. The imposing fence would deter most from entering or even attempting the journey if they can't get around it.

 

[NolanVoyd]

Ridiculous

fact.

. Sure they'll bring torches, acetylene tanks all the tubing, the blow torch and carry it all on their backs over 100's of miles.

individual illegals dont. Coyotes do.

why do you have such strong opinions about things you obviously know nothing about?

Of course no one will notice it as it takes them hours to cut through.

no one is around to notice.

they do t do it in the middle of San Diego or El Paso.

Sheesh!

Learn!

The fence is buried 5 feet under ground. The imposing fence would deter most from entering or even attempting the journey if they can't get around it.

But they can easily get through, under or around it.

They have tunnels that are over a mile long in some cases.

 

[Gatsby]

The Supreme Court spelled this out in US vs Wong Kim Ark. There are three, and only three, groups of people who are not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" while they are physically present in America:

1. Foreign diplomats
2. People in a hostile invading army occupying the country
3. Native Americans on reservations

Everyone else is "subject to the jurisdiction thereof", and therefore if they have a child in America, that child gets birthright citizenship via the 14th Amendment. (Native Americans born here also get birthright citizenship, but not because of the 14th Amendment.)

 

[Rich2018]

No, see Amanda Knox.

But if a British citizen murders a US citizen in say France, is the UK citizen subject to US jurisdiction ?

 

[Questerr]

But if a British citizen murders a US citizen in say France, is the UK citizen subject to US jurisdiction ?

No. They would be tried in France.

Amanda Knox was an American who was accused of killing a UK citizen in Italy. She was tried in Italy. Italy had jurisdiction regardless of the citizenship of the victim or perpetrator.

 

[Rich2018]

No. They would be tried in France.

Amanda Knox was an American who was accused of killing a UK citizen in Italy. She was tried in Italy. Italy had jurisdiction regardless of the citizenship of the victim or perpetrator.

What if it never came to trial in France, and the UK citizen travelled to the USA one day ?

 

[Questerr]

What if it never came to trial in France, and the UK citizen travelled to the USA one day ?

It would still be under France’s jurisdiction.

 

[Rich2018]

It would still be under France’s jurisdiction.

So US justice would not be interested ?

 

[Questerr]

So US justice would not be interested ?

The US Justice Department wouldn’t have jurisdiction. If the French declined to prosecute that would be the end of it.

 

[Rich2018]

The US Justice Department wouldn’t have jurisdiction. If the French declined to prosecute that would be the end of it.

"When a US citizen is murdered overseas, the US can prosecute the crime under 18 U.S. Code § 1119. The Attorney General must approve the prosecution, and the prosecution cannot proceed if the foreign country has already tried the case. "

Google Search

 

[Questerr]

"When a US citizen is murdered overseas, the US can prosecute the crime under 18 U.S. Code § 1119. The Attorney General must approve the prosecution, and the prosecution cannot proceed if the foreign country has already tried the case. "

Google Search

Stand corrected.

 

[Rich2018]

Stand corrected.

Not many posters on here are as gracious as you

Peace out.