Thread: CRUZ IMMIGRATION PLAN SUMMARY

The title is very misleading because the governments right to eminent domain is not in question, it's the law. This article was designed to be one of those gotcha articles, but it completely misses the point. Furthermore, it's only cuts, which we know can be taken out of context if the whole discussion is not considered. Moreover, Cruz does not support the abuse of eminent domain. That means he wouldn't support the taken of property for casinos, parking lots, and ball parks. As he said, the border fence is an issue of national security, so of course he would support eminent domain to build the border fence. I'm staunchly opposed to the abuse of eminent domain as every American should be, but unfortunately it is necessary is some instances. I'd say the security of our nation from invasion is one of those instances.

Originally Posted by ReformUSA2012

Those business's are still considered legal business's and they need to go after them as well. Plenty of business's held by illegal aliens, immigrants, and even citizens look specifically for illegal aliens while more so business's held by illegal aliens and immigrants. But when they are at risk of losing their business and a huge chunk of their money as well then things could change.

Far as birthright citizenship as long as 1 parent is a US citizen at time of birth then no issue. But citizenship should pass through the mother if not married and if a US citizen father signed the birth certificate at birth should be able to claim US citizenship as well. Cases like Cruz wouldn't be at odds as long as 1 biological or through marriage parent at birth is a US Citizen. The issue would come down to classes of Citizenship such as a Natural Born Citizen or a plain old Citizen.

You are missing the point regarding businesses owned by immigrants. The problem is from immigrants who go into business for the specific purpose of hiring immigrants and especially illegal immigrants. These immigrants would not even be immigrants if they could not plan on hiring illegals. Immigrants need to be threatened with deportation and loss of citizenship (if they have it) if they hire illegals. And no green card should ever be issued for employment by non-citizens or citizens who became citizens by applying for it.

Again, one parent cannot be sufficient for establish birthright citizenship. As I pointed above, if only only one parent is sufficient, then the other parent can be a criminal, completely incapable of having legal entry into the US. The only possible interpretation of the whole idea of birthright citizenship is that both parents must be US citizens in order to bestow citizenship on their offspring. Anything less than that is corrupt. This is what a Natural Born Citizen is, it is somebody born of parents who are both US citizens. Anything else is a simple corruption of language.

Sure would be nice if we could stay on topic.

Originally Posted by pkskyali

Again, one parent cannot be sufficient for establish birthright citizenship....

I misspoke meaning to say only citizenship. I was working on another thing in related to natural born citizenship which carried over accidentally to this post. I agree fully on it taking 2 parents to get natural born status and its even stated by the First Congress in saying "And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the Unites States, shall be considered as natural born citizens." which citizens is plural not singular. It means you need more then one citizen parent. The SCOTUS has ruled that to interpret every letter and symbol must have a meaning which logically would conclude that lack thereof would also have meaning. There is no doubt. Its just liberal globalists who are trying to do away with that with things like nonsense notions such as thinking about those who never knew their father with all the single mothers and broken homes.