Breaking: Judge stops deportation proceedings against Danbury f...

This cockroach judge needs to be tossed off the bench and the illegals need to get the boot without hesitation sans their anchor larvae. This case may set a precedent that could devastate this country. Somebody needs to find out who appointed this imbecile judge.

THE LAW is the law. These people broke our laws and they should NOT be rewarded. The message is if you come over illegally, have children and you will get a green card. SHAME.

I love the little bonding there between maria and rico. You're both a disgrace to you're people.
Maybe there is a reason no-one wants you using their bathroom, I could see why. I was actually going to post a positive thing about this story, then I read the three posts from the anti-Americans, then said f*&% it, why bother?

Please join the fight for OUR COUNTRY!!

NumbersUSA.com

BetterImmigration.com

Over a century ago the Supreme Court confirmed a restrictive interpretation of citizenship in the so-called "Slaughter-House cases" (83 US 36 (1873 and 112 US 94 (1884). In the 1884 Elk V. Wilkins case, the phrase "subject to its jurisdiction" was interpreted to EXCLUDE "children of ministers, consuls, and citizens of foreign states born within the United States". The court essentially stated that the status of the parents determines the citizenship of the child. To qualify children for birthright citizenship, based on the 14th Amendment, parents must owe "direct and immediate allegiance" to the U.S. and be "completely subject" to its jurisdiction. In other words they must be United States citizens. In 1889, the Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court case once again, in a ruling based strictly on the 14th Amendment, concluded that the status of the parents was crucial in determining the citizenship of the child. The current misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment is based in part upon the presumption that the Wong Kim Art
ruling encompassed illegal aliens. In fact, it did NOT address the children of illegal aliens and non-immigrant aliens, but rather determined an allegiance for LEGAL IMMIGRANT PARENTS based on the meaning of the word domicile. Since it is inconceivable that illegal alien parents could have a LEGAL domicile in the U.S., the ruling clearly did not extend birthright citizenship to children of illegal alien parents. Indeeed, the ruling strengthened the original intent of the 14th Amendment which was clearly NOT to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law and obtaining citizenship for their offspring.
Emotion should not distort law!

Get the REAL INVASION NEWS at

AmericanPatrol.com

OutragedPatriots.com

OneOldVet.com

ImmigrationWatchdog.com

social democrat wrote:

<quoted text>In the entire Constitution, this is probably one of a handful of sentences that do not have any wiggle room. The intent could not be more plain: "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." They're talking here about real persons, not the corporations that were given personhood by judicial decree.

Wrong;anchor babies are not suject to the juridiction of theunited states:they are subject to the laws thereof. Their parents cannot be tried for treason,their parents cannot be tried for crimes committed in a third country or their own though an american can be.That is because their parents are not under the jurisdiction of th USA just as diplomats are not. Children of diplomats are therefore not citizens of the USA. My mother was not a citizen of the USA because she was a Cherokee Indian until 1924 when an aact of congress made all Indians citizens. The author of the 14th amendment made it clear that the 14th did not apply to foreigners,or children of ambassadors or diplomats.

Illegals who squirt out "anchor babies" should not be rewarded with citizenship. This should be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. We need to revise the laws so that these illegals who breeds like rodents don't get their offspring made US Citizens. This judge should be removed from the bench. He obviously has no respect for the law.

The judge was wrong, they should have been deported, along with their children. I know some of you won't like hearing the truth but the truth is, children born here to illegal immigrants are NOT U.S. citizens.

It is clear the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment had no intention of freely giving away American citizenship to just anyone simply because they may have been born on American soil, something our courts have wrongfully assumed for way too long.

The constitution of the United States does not grant citizenship at birth to just anyone who happens to be born within American jurisdiction. It is the allegiance (complete jurisdiction) of the child’s birth parents at the time of birth that determines the child’s citizenship--not geographical location. If the United States does not have complete jurisdiction, for example, to compel a child’s parents to Jury Duty–then the U.S. does not have the total, complete jurisdiction demanded by the Fourteenth Amendment to make their child a citizen of the United States by birth.

The framers succeeded in their desire to remove all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. They also succeeded in making both their intent and construction clear for future generations of courts and government. Whether our government or courts will start to honor and uphold the supreme law of the land for which they are obligated to by oath, is another very disturbing matter.

Maybe someday we'll have a President & Congress that will uphold and enforce the laws of our country.

Also I might add that you are only reading section 1 of the 14th. Read section 5 where it gives the CONGRESS the exclusive power to decide what the 14th means and how it is and how it is applied.

equalinall wrote:

<quoted text>
They DID NOT come in illegally. They came with visitors visas. Temporary Visas. They tried to change their status before their temporary status expired. They thought they were in process. There were no gaps in their legality, that they knew of. The Lawyer screwed them over, without them knowing. They were NOT here illegally, except by technicality, fault on the part of their lawyer, NOT their own. And that is why they are still here today, and why they won their case. You racist xenophobes need to go slink back into your cave now..justice, for once, was served :)

Expired Visa and my attorney didn't take care of the paperwork, they were only here illegally by technicality?????? heard that one before. By the way, you forgot hate mongers, bigots, natzi's.....you know the standard open border fare.

Typical left-wing scumbag judge. What else is new? Federal law gets trumped by state and local law?? Since when? Appeal the sucker and throw the bums out, along with their jackpot babies and teens. The fact that one anchor child is an honor student is besides the point.

equalinall wrote:

YAY! Oh my God! I am so happy to hear this news. Congratulations Pereira Family! Best wishes to you, and enjoy your freedom. May you be prosperous, and happy!

Yes, it must be wonderful to violate the laws and sovereignty of another country and be rewarded for it.
The parents must be proud of the message they have sent their children.

carlos m wrote:

Also I might add that you are only reading section 1 of the 14th. Read section 5 where it gives the CONGRESS the exclusive power to decide what the 14th means and how it is and how it is applied.

Explain where Section 5 allows Congress to decide what the 14th means and how it is applied?

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

It states Congress has the power to enforce...not change the meaning.

Our forefathers were clear and they did not grant birthright citizenship to any child born in this country to parents here illegally. As far as children born here to Mexican citizens who are in this country illegally, Mexico has already claimed jurisdiction over these children under Article 30 of the Mexican Constitution.

Past time to contact your Congressmen and tell them to support HR 1940 which will put a stop to this citizenship by stealth.

What ever happened to the Rule of Law? Drop an "anchor baby" on US soil, and you're immune from our immigration laws? Another activist judge dictates from the bench. What a disgrace.

Judging from the comments, I see most of the people in Liberal Leiberman contry are happy. Let's see if we can bus all the illegals from my State (California) to your State. Then we'll all be happy.

VivaLaMigra wrote:

What ever happened to the Rule of Law? Drop an "anchor baby" on US soil, and you're immune from our immigration laws? Another activist judge dictates from the bench. What a disgrace.

All you folks who constantly harp on the "rule of law"... Do you know how the US acquired Texas, and parts of New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Oklahoma and Kansas? Do you know that our President and VP have placed themselves above the law for the last 7+ years? Please explain why you think the "rule of law" applies now to this case, and furthermore please explain why you think the US was *ever* governed by the "rule of law." We have been a Corporatocracy for well over 100 years--if we were ever anything else. You can carry on about your "laws" and your "courts", but until the Corporatocracy decides that it has enough cheap labor, it will continue to allow "illegal" immigrants in--meanwhile you're all just wasting your breath and allowing yourselves to be distracted from the real problems.

social democrat wrote:

<quoted text>All you folks who constantly harp on the "rule of law"... Do you know how the US acquired Texas, and parts of New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Oklahoma and Kansas? Do you know that our President and VP have placed themselves above the law for the last 7+ years? Please explain why you think the "rule of law" applies now to this case, and furthermore please explain why you think the US was *ever* governed by the "rule of law." We have been a Corporatocracy for well over 100 years--if we were ever anything else. You can carry on about your "laws" and your "courts", but until the Corporatocracy decides that it has enough cheap labor, it will continue to allow "illegal" immigrants in--meanwhile you're all just wasting your breath and allowing yourselves to be distracted from the real problems.

You're right. No need for rule of law. This is a horrible country. I don't know why anyone would come here. By the way, if someone stole your Social Security #, should we let them keep it. Seems fair to me.