Trump driving migrant debate among GOP field

[Sy_Noe]

Well, there’s been some debate about whether the 14th Amendment would need to be changed since the intent was to state that slaves born in the US were US citizens and was not intended to define any person born within the US as a citizen. Comes down to interpretation of (they cite congressional records of debating the amendment as evidence of congressional intent):

‘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.’

I agree with that because of precedent and the way that citizenship has been provided in the past for anyone born here, the courts won’t reverse it and would require 14th amendment to be changed.

Exactly

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

The 14th Amendment does NOT allow for anchor babies. But let’s assume that it does for a moment. Do you think that this scam should continue? :ehh:

My Grandmother was born in Chicago in 1911. Her parents were Italian immigrants. They were not citizens. When she was six years old her parents (my great grandfather had lived here for 17 years and worked as a railroad worker) moved back to Italy

My grandmother had US citizenship. She had a US passport.

She came back to the US in the 1960’s as a US citizen.

SO, there is at least 100 years of precedence that babies born here to foreigners are considered US citizens. In fact my Aunt was born in Italy and because her mother was a US citizen, the US granted my Aunt citizenship. She was naturalized, she became a citizen at her birth. She would have been 75.

“Anchor babies” cannot sponsor their parents to stay in the US until they turn 21.

 

[anthony022071]

How do the ideas put forward by Trump mesh with the Church’s social teaching?

His proposals on the illegals doesn’t fit with the Church’s social teaching of the past few decades,or rather,some of the American bishops’ teaching,but I don’t think that traditional Church moral doctrine forbids what he has proposed.

I am pretty sure that the Bishops would soundly reject Trumps ideas.

That would be true for some of the bishops. Some of them have the same views that progressives have on social justice matters, and they support the policies of the Democratic Party as if they were called for by traditional Catholic doctrine. They just go along with any progressive views and Democratic Party policies that are not clearly against official Catholic teaching and which have the superficial appearance of justice or compassion.

 

[FollowChrist34]

His proposals on the illegals doesn’t fit with the Church’s social teaching of the past few decades,or rather,some of the American bishops’ teaching,but I don’t think that traditional Church moral doctrine forbids what he has proposed.

That would be true for some of the bishops. Some of them have the same views that progressives have on social justice matters, and they support the policies of the Democratic Party as if they were called for by traditional Catholic doctrine. They just go along with any progressive views and Democratic Party policies that are not clearly against official Catholic teaching and which have the superficial appearance of justice or compassion.

Bishops are human. My guess is their politics cover the spectrum just like the laity and clergy. I respectfully submit that in my view some bishops may overemphasize social justice at the expense of law and morality, and others seem to almost solely concern themselves with morality at the expense of social justice.

As for deporting 11 million people, I agree it is mad, and I am not even a social justice Catholic. I want immigration reform. To me this just feels like playing to the crowds, feeding the Trump loyal. It is unworkable. It also confirms just about one of the ugliest stereotypes of the “xenophobic” GOP out there. Makes me cringe. My dislike of Trump grows by the day.

 

[Seamus_L]

I think the best solution to illegal aliens is to heavily fine anyone who employs them. Then when the job market dries up they’ll have good reason to go back home.

 

[Path_Finder]

Bishops are human. My guess is their politics cover the spectrum just like the laity and clergy. I respectfully submit that in my view some bishops may overemphasize social justice at the expense of law and morality, and others seem to almost solely concern themselves with morality at the expense of social justice.

As for deporting 11 million people, I agree it is mad, and I am not even a social justice Catholic. I want immigration reform. To me this just feels like playing to the crowds, feeding the Trump loyal. It is unworkable. It also confirms just about one of the ugliest stereotypes of the “xenophobic” GOP out there. Makes me cringe. My dislike of Trump grows by the day.

So, I guess we have the right to break the law, glad to know it, maybe every state can have legislation introduced like the state of California for home abortions, great things these voting blocks do.

Maybe we should consider amnesty for shoplifters or bank robbers.

Ike deported 2.1 million, 3.4 million left under Truman.

We should do all so that the jobs are not available along with governmental services and they will return on their own.

factcheck.org/2010/07/hoover-truman-ike-mass-deporters/

 

[anthony022071]

Bishops are human. My guess is their politics cover the spectrum just like the laity and clergy. I respectfully submit that in my view some bishops may overemphasize social justice at the expense of law and morality, and others seem to almost solely concern themselves with morality at the expense of social justice.

True social justice is morality. They aren’t separate categories. The problem with some of the bishops is not that overemphasize social justice is that their idea of social justice is a counterfeit of true justice. It is progressive and socialist,not Christian. They give it a religious veneer but it is materialist and morally lax in content. It is not grounded in natural law morality.

As for deporting 11 million people, I agree it is mad, and I am not even a social justice Catholic. I want immigration reform. To me this just feels like playing to the crowds, feeding the Trump loyal. It is unworkable. It also confirms just about one of the ugliest stereotypes of the “xenophobic” GOP out there. Makes me cringe. My dislike of Trump grows by the day.

Every nation has an interest in preserving and protecting its composition and culture and character. The purpose of having a nation in the first place is for a people to have a homeland where they can flourish. It is not to have a place where any number of people from all other nations can come and realize their dreams. Not only should illegal immigration be prevented but legal immigration should be restricted. It defeats the purpose of having a stable,well-ordered nation or state or town to let it be flooded with foreigners. People who live in large cities that already have diverse populations may not get upset at the change in population,but people who live in small towns with a distinct population and culture do get upset when they see the change. People want stability where they live. It doesn’t matter if other people call it xenophobia. The preservation of the country and local communities is more important than having a tolerant attitude.

 

[FollowChrist34]

So, I guess we have the right to break the law, glad to know it, maybe every state can have legislation introduced like the state of California for home abortions, great things these voting blocks do.

Maybe we should consider amnesty for shoplifters or bank robbers.

Ike deported 2.1 million, 3.4 million left under Truman.

We should do all so that the jobs are not available along with governmental services and they will return on their own.

factcheck.org/2010/07/hoover-truman-ike-mass-deporters/

:ehh:

Is this in answer to my post? If yes, in what way?

Did I say you had the right to break the law?

Did I say we should consider amnesty for shoplifters or bank robbers?

Did Ike or Truman deport 11 million, many of whom are not murderers, shoplifters or rapists or bank robbers and who are employed by American employers? Children, the elderly, women?

Did I say I opposed effective immigration reform? Specifically, did I say I opposed deporting felons?

I simply said it was mad to deport 11 million people. I said I wanted immigration reform in lieu of a human rights fiasco on an unprecedented scale.

 

[FollowChrist34]

True social justice is morality. They aren’t separate categories. The problem with some of the bishops is not that overemphasize social justice is that their idea of social justice is a counterfeit of true justice. It is progressive and socialist,not Christian. They give it a religious veneer but it is materialist and morally lax in content. It is not grounded in natural law morality.

Uh, with you on some of this. I like the part about social justice being morality - has a nice ring. Doesn’t change my opinion that some bishops emphasize moral issues and ignore social justice ones. I agree with the spirit of your comments that some bishops overemphasize social justice concerns. I won’t speculate as to why. I fully agree this group can often downplay or sidestep critical moral issues. My ideal bishop would be a balance between these two groups.

Every nation has an interest in preserving and protecting its composition and culture and character. The purpose of having a nation in the first place is for a people to have a homeland where they can flourish. It is not to have a place where any number of people from all other nations can come and realize their dreams. Not only should illegal immigration be prevented but legal immigration should be restricted. It defeats the purpose of having a stable,well-ordered nation or state or town to let it be flooded with foreigners. People who live in large cities that already have diverse populations may not get upset at the change in population,but people who live in small towns with a distinct population and culture do get upset when they see the change. People want stability where they live. It doesn’t matter if other people call it xenophobia. The preservation of the country and local communities is more important than having a tolerant attitude.

Again, I agree with some of this - a nation has a right to protect its cultural identity, heritage and its people. But the US is a nation built on immigration and also one of the wealthiest nations on the planet. There is a place for immigration. All I am saying is that I want legal immigration, those individuals coming in first. Also I want immigration to come in waves that we can handle, so we can assimilate newcomers. I don’t want immigrants who retain their culture to the point of a separate identity. Figuring out what to do with 11 million people is a tall order. I don’t think sending them all back in boxes is the answer. Did Trump go to college - does anyone know? “Flooded with foreigners” is getting a little skinhead for my taste, a little National Front.

 

[Path_Finder]

Uh, with you on some of this. I like the part about social justice being morality - has a nice ring. Doesn’t change my opinion that some bishops emphasize moral issues and ignore social justice ones. I agree with the spirit of your comments that some bishops overemphasize social justice concerns. I won’t speculate as to why. I fully agree this group can often downplay or sidestep critical moral issues. My ideal bishop would be a balance between these two groups.

Again, I agree with some of this - a nation has a right to protect its cultural identity, heritage and its people. But the US is a nation built on immigration and also one of the wealthiest nations on the planet. There is a place for immigration. All I am saying is that I want legal immigration, those individuals coming in first. Also I want immigration to come in waves that we can handle, so we can assimilate newcomers. I don’t want immigrants who retain their culture to the point of a separate identity. Figuring out what to do with 11 million people is a tall order. I don’t think sending them all back in boxes is the answer. Did Trump go to college - does anyone know? “Flooded with foreigners” is getting a little skinhead for my taste, a little National Front.

Maybe you are right, “flooded with foreigners” may not be accurate, maybe he should have said “invasion”.

Oh, and a place for immigration, gee, I thought we were already accepting 1,000,000 legal immigrants a year. I don’t know if any other country has that many entering annually.

 

[Path_Finder]

I think the best solution to illegal aliens is to heavily fine anyone who employs them. Then when the job market dries up they’ll have good reason to go back home.

From what I understand, this sounds a bit like Romney’s “self-deportation” but actually, it does have merits. This is what Everify also would help to accomplish.

We want to be hospitable to the foreigner but look at Italy with so many persons coming in, there does have to be a measure of responsibility as well.

In the end, those who wish to come in is close to a bottomless barrel, 11 million? 30 million? And chain migration on top of this? There is a lot to consider.

 

[didymus]

I think the best solution to illegal aliens is to heavily fine anyone who employs them. Then when the job market dries up they’ll have good reason to go back home.

If I recall correctly that was Romney’s positions in the last go-round. He said w/o jobs illegals would “self-deport” and he was portrayed as a monster for it.

It will be interesting to see what happens as the field thins out. Trump also wants to severely limit legal immigration and abrogate a lot of NAFTA so he’ll get a lot of pushback from the business community.

 

[Path_Finder]

:ehh:

Is this in answer to my post? If yes, in what way?

Did I say you had the right to break the law?

Did I say we should consider amnesty for shoplifters or bank robbers?

Did Ike or Truman deport 11 million, many of whom are not murderers, shoplifters or rapists or bank robbers and who are employed by American employers? Children, the elderly, women?

Did I say I opposed effective immigration reform? Specifically, did I say I opposed deporting felons?

I simply said it was mad to deport 11 million people. I said I wanted immigration reform in lieu of a human rights fiasco on an unprecedented scale.

Definition of Amnesty:

Amnesty is defined as: “A pardon extended by the government to a group or class of persons, usually for a political offense; the act of a sovereign power officially forgiving certain classes of persons who are subject to trial but have not yet been convicted.” It includes more than pardon, in as much as it obliterates all legal remembrance of the offense.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amnesty

If we are forgiving them and in a sense rewarding them by not turning them back, in effect, this is amnesty. That’s why I asked should we do the same with those other people.

We can deport 1, what about a higher number? The costs for all of this could be high too but we probably have laws to already deal with this. I’m not sure if each individual should get the “hearing” whereas effectively, they often do not end up showing up for their hearing.

Now, for the time being, some plans are to give them “legal residency” but not “citizenship”; this might be practical and then, in the meantime, secure the border.

 

[stevegravy]

IMHO which counts for nothing I submit the following for consideration:

!. It is possible to round up 11 million illegals if we have the will and strength of character to do it.

1. Don’t break up families; send the anchor babies back with their parents. When they reach their majority, with their USA passport they could return if they wanted to.
2. Nothing is violated by Catholic social justice teaching just violating social justice warrior interpretation.
3. Anyone following the recent supreme court’s decision making will know words mean nothing and are ambiguous (new interpretations needed every day), legal reasoning and common sense is vacant. In short it has morphed into a totalitarian operation where anything goes. Who knows how they would interpret born or citizen. So Constitution, forget about it. It is a prop in a comic soap opera.

Now my prognostication:

Nothing is going to change. The hotel, motel, agriculture and food processing industries as well as some factory jobs depend on unskilled labor just the kind that these folks bring. This whole kabuki dance is a made for media show, just like everything else in the good o’l USSA. Your precious vote means nothing; when a majority of bozos in black robes can overturn laws and state constitutions duly enacted by a majority of a legislature or a citizenry for no better reason then a fortune cookie saying. Powerful interests want these illegals here for the exploitative purposes they cannot achieve with the minority and poorer classes of native born people. It is only my opinion that even if Trump rode this horse and actually won with it, Washington would do nothing. Even a Republocrat super majority would produce fantastical reasons why nothing can be done right now until everything is forgotten.

In short just sit back and enjoy the show.

 

[WillyAL]

1. Don’t break up families; send the anchor babies back with their parents. When they reach their majority, with their USA passport they could return if they wanted to.

What other U.S. citizens do you want to deport?

I strongly disagree with the concept of birthright citizenship. That said, the Constitution provides for it. Those “anchor babies” citizenship rights are just as valid as yours or mine.

Looks like Obama isn’t the only one trying to trample on the Constitution.

 

[FollowChrist34]

!. It is possible to round up 11 million illegals if we have the will and strength of character to do it.
Agreed. Look at the Nazis. They exterminated 6 million. Though we will need that level of organization and sophistication. Do we have it? Can Trump get it in place in time? Is it perhaps more practical to exterminate them? Cost effective? Time saving? Definitely something to consider.

Or is this too “social justice warrior” - not sure on what that means. Are those the ones arguing for sending them all back or the ones trying to stop/limit it on humanitarian grounds?

1. Don’t break up families; send the anchor babies back with their parents. When they reach their majority, with their USA passport they could return if they wanted to.
2. Nothing is violated by Catholic social justice teaching just violating social justice warrior interpretation. [/FONT

Good. I agree babies should have a guardian. I want to go on record here as opposed to boxing them up and sending them back on their own.

(Does Jesus read CAF? - God help us; I sincerely hope not)

Nothing is going to change. The hotel, motel, agriculture and food processing industries as well as some factory jobs depend on unskilled labor just the kind that these folks bring. This whole kabuki dance is a made for media show, just like everything else in the good o’l USSA.

Agreed. Especially with immigration policies like this coming from the GOP and the complete chaos and lawlessness we have on this issue from the Democrats.

My point: effective immigration reform is essential. It should be bi-partisan. It should respect human rights. Believe it or not, I still like Trump for the simple reason that he is speaking out on issues that others are afraid to touch - and now are forced to.

My hope: we tone down this wild rhetoric before it elects Joe Biden. We elect a GOP President who improves the immigration crisis in this country. Oh, and doesn’t deport or exterminate 11 million people.


[/quote]

 

[Path_Finder]

IMHO which counts for nothing I submit the following for consideration:

!. It is possible to round up 11 million illegals if we have the will and strength of character to do it.

1. Don’t break up families; send the anchor babies back with their parents. When they reach their majority, with their USA passport they could return if they wanted to.
2. Nothing is violated by Catholic social justice teaching just violating social justice warrior interpretation.
3. Anyone following the recent supreme court’s decision making will know words mean nothing and are ambiguous (new interpretations needed every day), legal reasoning and common sense is vacant. In short it has morphed into a totalitarian operation where anything goes. Who knows how they would interpret born or citizen. So Constitution, forget about it. It is a prop in a comic soap opera.

Now my prognostication:

Nothing is going to change. The hotel, motel, agriculture and food processing industries as well as some factory jobs depend on unskilled labor just the kind that these folks bring. This whole kabuki dance is a made for media show, just like everything else in the good o’l USSA. Your precious vote means nothing; when a majority of bozos in black robes can overturn laws and state constitutions duly enacted by a majority of a legislature or a citizenry for no better reason then a fortune cookie saying. Powerful interests want these illegals here for the exploitative purposes they cannot achieve with the minority and poorer classes of native born people. It is only my opinion that even if Trump rode this horse and actually won with it, Washington would do nothing. Even a Republocrat super majority would produce fantastical reasons why nothing can be done right now until everything is forgotten.

In short just sit back and enjoy the show.

This sounds reasonable. Americans should be of the utmost concern.

“Sean, there have been over the course of the last five years, since the fall of ’08, over 203,000 individuals who have come into Texas illegally who have been booked into our county jails. Those individuals have accounted for over 3,000 homicides and over 8,000 sexual assaults. We can’t afford to wait for Washington to secure this border. We’ve had enough.”- Rick Perry
thegatewaypundit.com/2014/07/shock-report-rick-perry-illegal-immigrants-behind-3000-homicides-8000-sexual-assaults-since-08-video/

Prayers for those victims of illegal aliens:

 

[Ridgerunner]

I think the best solution to illegal aliens is to heavily fine anyone who employs them. Then when the job market dries up they’ll have good reason to go back home.

This really won’t happen unless employers are allowed to look behind fake ID or there is, once again, complicity between employers and ICE.

E-verify is not helpful in identifying illegal workers because all it does is verify the legitimacy of the social security number. Good forgers always use real social security numbers, and the better ones use numbers for people who match up the gender and relative age of the person using the ID. It is unlawful for employers to question ID that is valid on its face because it could be “disciminatory” as administered. Presumably all white or black applicants with definite American accents would not be questioned, whereas all Hispanics with poor English or others with poor English or strong accents would be.

That has been known for years and years.

What actually was going on during the period immigration laws were really being enforced was that if an employer believed it was getting a number of illegals on the factory floor or whatever, he would call ICE and send ICE a bunch of the ID the employer doubted. ICE would then really investigate and “raid” the workplace if it found a lot of fakes in the ID. For the most part, the employers and ICE were complicit. What was the reward to the employer? Not getting a real “raid” and severe penalties. If they cooperated, they were immune.

Of course, a lot of people got all dewy-eyed over seizing illegals at the workplace and deporting them, so why at the workplace? Because that’s the only place one could reliably find them. Why a raid? Because if you grabbed just one, their network would tip off all the rest and they would go underground until it blew over.

It’s a tough problem, but it really can be solved.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

According to Andrew Napolitano, has stated that each person being deported is entitled to a hearing and an appeal. 11 million of them. The judicial system can handle about 250,000 per year.

He added that any president can rescind an executive order of a predecessor. But the judge pointed out that every undocumented immigrant that Trump intends to deport would be entitled to a hearing and an appeal.

“That’s between 11 and 13 million hearings and appeals. The most the United States has ever conducted in a year is 250,000. So do the math,” Napolitano said, adding that the taxpayer would foot the bill for the proceedings, including defense costs

insider.foxnews.com/2015/08/17/what-can-trump-actually-do-legally-immigration-deportations-judge-napolitano-explains

I’d like to point out that not all undocumented immigrants are Mexican.

There are an estimated 50,000 undocumented Irish immigrants in NYC and Boston.

 

[sallybutler]

I thought E-verify made sure that the SSN matched the name given.