Constitutional Scholar/Attorney/Host Mark Levin: There is NO Birthright Citizenship

Constitutional Scholar/Attorney/Host Mark Levin: There is NO Birthright Citizenship
https://lidblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/2lkg03-1200x630.jpg" width="371" height="194" class="align-center"/>
by Jeff Dunetz

{lidblog.com} ~ Mark Levin is more than a talk radio star, he is a successful attorney who was the chief of staff to President Reagan Attorney General Edwin Meese and a Constitutional scholar who has written six books (by my count) on Constitutional issues. Levin explains that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution does not grant birthright citizenship on anyone born inside our borders. He argues that says there is no such constitutional rule.

Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution which lays out the powers of Congress says.
  • “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States (…)To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States…” 
Levin also explained how those who crafted the original amendment felt about what they were doing with the 14th Amendment:
  • “‘This will not of course include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens … but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship.’ … Is it not plain English? Is he not as clear as can be that it does not include aliens, it does not include foreigners. … The republican basis for citizenship is consent! Consent of the country! You can’t self-immigrate. You can’t claim jurisdiction because you happen to walk into the United States.”
  • “What is the bottom line here? Let’s number this: They wanted to make certain that former slaves would be treated as citizens of the United States, because certain states were still resistant. … They exempted Indians, because Indians still, certainly back then, were often considered citizens of particular tribes. But these actually were very forward-looking individuals. They specifically excluded aliens and foreigners.
”Three years ago, “the Great One” spoke about the same issue with Sean Hannity on FNC. Levin told Hannity that the 14th Amendment does not give citizenship to children of illegal immigrants who are born in the US.

The radio talker said that those claiming that the Constitution allows birthright citizenship are dead wrong. Levin said that Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution grants absolute power to Congress to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.

Levin went on to explain that means that only Congress — not a president or the courts — has the power to regulate immigration.

“Of course Trump is right and Cruz is right and Sessions is right. They’re all right,” Levin said of those claiming then that birthright citizenship does not exist.
  • “If you want a policy of open borders, that anybody born here should become a United States citizen, you amend the Constitution,” Levin said. “We don’t have to amend the Constitution. It says what we say it says. By statute, going forward, prospectively, Congress can in fact say … ‘No, you cannot make children of illegal aliens American citizens automatically.’”

Views: 93

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

He is really a Constitutional Scholar?, well I just thought he had a big mouth...:)

Tif

There is no question that he is a constitutional scholar.....

 I did watch a video about him talking about the Declaration of Independence, he really did not impress me, a matter a fact he did not share all the truth.

Tif:

Mark Levin is a Lawyer and Constitutional scholar ... a well accomplished and learned scholar of the law.  He is respected by all major political parties and his comments should be taken as true.. unless one has specific CREDIBLE sources to discount them.  

Fringe conspiratorial groups are not credible sources unless they provide acceptable evidence ... they must be discounted in their views as they are often distorted by their ideology and bias. 

Posting volumes of items that are unrelated or tangently associated with the arguments at hand add little value to clarifying or settleing disputed information... Please site references and links to documents that are cogent and relative to the disputed matter... so we may all be better informed. 

If ya say so, I was not impressed, I reviewed a video chat about the Declaration of Independence, him and his guest did not even come close to sharing the truth.

 Now personally I do not care what he has to say, he failed to stop the elite, so if he has all of this going on for him, why are the elite more afraid of us Red Necks?

Hmmm?

 

Well informed and balanced individuals will always entertain the cogent views of others... including those they don't agree with.  Dismissing mainstream views on Constitutional law has created the mess we are in today.  Mark Levin has a good grasp on Constitutional Law and the rights of individuals, along with the chains the Constitution places on the Federal Government. 

Really, The Federal Reserve is still in our face, so if he is a well accomplished and learned scholar of the law.
He must have a lot of the Federal Notes in his hip pocket.

There you go again... off on some tangental trip...this blog is about Birthright Citizenship ... and Constitutional law regarding its mandates... not the Federal Reserve.

Federal Reserve is now in the topic, like da!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Federal Reserve is still in our face, so if he, (Mark Levin ) is a well accomplished and learned scholar of the law.
He must have a lot of the Federal Notes in his hip pocket.

Like da... what topic... the Fed is our Central Bank... what are you suggesting? Not many here support a Fed as it is unconstitutional... the US Treasury and Congress are supposed to manage our money system... assigning it to a semi-private CENTRAL BANK is not constitutional.  We need to phase out the Fed... so what?  We need to phase out lots of unconstitutional policy and programs.  Be more specific... on your point.

You missed the memo Ronald,
Them nifty people of the Fed, admitted in a video, The Federal Reserve Banking System belongs to the Jewish Rothschild Family,
Its all very Jewish you know. All of them...
LOL Tif

PS, what people are appointed to the Federal Reserve, its their last names and their next of kin, just over the top of how they gained control of the Fed and then America's economy.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

Political Cartoons by AF BrancoPolitical Cartoons by Mike Lester

ALERT ALERT

‘Restrictive’ Gun Control Did Not Prevent Christchurch Massacre

 New Zealand requires licensing and in-depth background checks for would-be gun owners, but neither gun control policy prevented Friday’s attacks in Christchurch that killed nearly 50 people.

The University of Sydney’s GunPolicy.org describes New Zealand’s gun control as “restrictive,” because owning guns in that nation is not a guaranteed right but a privilege extended by the government.


Moreover, before legally owning a gun, residents must acquire a license. The acquisition of that license involves passage of a background check that “considers criminal, mental health, medical, addiction and domestic violence records.” Third party references must also be provided to authorities during the license procurement process and interviews are conducted with the applicant’s immediate family.

Even after licensing, New Zealanders cannot buy a handgun or “military style” semiautomatic without providing an acceptable explanation for why they want such a firearm. Additionally, those firearms must be registered with the central government upon acquisition.

It is illegal to sell a gun to anyone without a license, which means the background checks for license acquisition are universal; they cover all gun sales and transfers. And in the event that an individual is buying a gun from a friend or neighbor instead of retail, “the buyer… is obliged to pass official background checks before taking possession.” Also, “the number and type of firearms which can be sold by a licensed gun dealer to a single gun owner is limited to one pistol, military style semi-automatic firearm, or restricted firearm per acquisition permit.”

Further, gun show sales are highly regulated in New Zealand.

Democrat lawmakers in the U.S. are promoting many of these very gun controls–universal background checks, licensing, more gun show regulation, limits on the number of guns that can be purchased, etc.–arguing that these measures will make Americans safe. It is not yet clear how the killer in Christchurch acquired his weapons, yet we see that these gun controls did not prevent an attack that killed nearly 50 unarmed innocents.

More than one mosque was attacked in Christchurch, and the shooters who converged on a mosque in Linwood were reportedly chased by an apparent attendee who happened to be armed for self-defense.

TRUTH - New Zealand Shooting

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service