Tuesday Noon ~ thefrontpagecover

~ Featuring ~ 
Voter ID Opponents Lose Again 
This Time in North Dakota
Hans von Spakovsky   
Birthright Citizenship is NOT in the Constitution
by Denise Simon
founderscode.com } ~ This topic has long been debated with no resolution including at the Supreme Court level. Much has been written about what ‘birthright’ is including in the New York Times as recently as in 2015... The simply requirement is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, not subject to a foreign power. A birth must be to parents who were legally domiciled to the United States as citizens themselves. There is no such thing legally as an anchor baby. There must be a provable bind to the United States. President Trump has ordered a team to investigate the definition of the 14th Amendment leading to his possible  signature of an Executive Order which would lead government agencies to act in accordance with the clarification and regulations around the Citizenship Clause. During the years of Ellis Islands, immigrants had to have money, the proven ability to earn a salary and not be an economic burden to the United States. 12 million people passed through Ellis Island and had for the time, a rigorous process to comply for entry. They included medical exams, have existing family members in the United States for connections and a safety net and prove existing financial means. There was quite a list of questions for the immigrants including those regarding a criminal record, being institutionalized for insanity and having some prior knowledge of the United States including facts of the Constitution, naming the 13 colonies and if they were an anarchist. There were in many cases immediate deportations for failures of passing fundamental stipulations. High praise should be given to the Trump administration for tackling the issue of birthright citizenship for clarification because the abuse of the system has been out of control, exploiting the anchor baby model. Take notice that even ABC news as recently as March of this year, 2019 addressed the issue of pregnant Russian women flocking to Miami to given birth just to gain citizenship under the anchor baby policy which is not nor has even been policy or legal. There are brokers around the world that facilitate these American births where the cost can range from $20,000 to $50,000. This includes travel, accommodations and the hospital expenses. This is otherwise known as ‘birth tourists’. But hey, Russia is not the only country. Nigeria, Mexico and China are included. We cant know the full number of those participating in  birth tourism but each year it is estimated to range in the 30-50,000 of women that make the trip. Not to be overlooked is the healthcare in itself, clearly better here than in their home country. Consider that a particular area of Miami, known as Sunny Isles Beach is teeming with Russians and has the nickname of little Moscow. So, next how about California? So as recently as 2018, the FBI had to perform a set of raids on maternity hotels and apartment complexes in an estimated 20 locations in and around Los Angeles. Ah, it seems these pregnant Chinese women had more expensive brokers as they paid in the range of $40-$80,000 for their travel, accommodations and hospital stay. Operations in Los Angeles obviously had quite the operation stateside as some of these locations witnessed trucks and fork lifts delivering pallets of diapers and other infant needs like formula.This all amounts to abuse of U.S. citizenship. Further:..
Curt Schilling ‘Absolutely Considering’ 
Arizona Run for Congress
by Collin Anderson 
freebeacon.com } ~ Three-time World Series champion and noted Trump supporter Curt Schilling said Sunday he is "absolutely considering" a congressional run in his home state of Arizona... Schilling, who flirted with a 2018 Massachusetts Senate run against Elizabeth dinky-Warren, told Armed American Radio’s Mark Walters he is "considering going back to Arizona and running for a congressional seat." He said his goal is to flip one of the five seats held by Democrats. "I haven’t said anything publicly, but I’m considering going back to Arizona and running for a congressional seat, one of the blue ones," Schilling said in the Sunday  interview. "It’s something that my wife and I have talked about, and she’s now becoming more and more pumped at the potential. Obviously we’re still quite a few discussions away, but yeah, it’s something we’re absolutely considering." Schilling expressed his hesitance to "put his family through" the same scrutiny that they endured when he floated a potential Massachusetts Senate run. He said a move back to Arizona may be easier given his strong ties to the state. Schilling’s father, Cliff Schilling, a master sergeant with the 101st Airborne Division, was stationed at Elmendorf Air Force Base in Anchorage, Alaska when Curt was born. The family moved multiple times, eventually settling in Phoenix, Arizona. Schilling went on to play high school and collegiate baseball in Arizona before spending 20 years in the Major Leagues where he won three World Series, including one with his hometown Arizona Diamondbacks. He was inducted into the Arizona Sports Hall of Fame in 2011.  Schilling’s political involvement dates back to his playing days in the MLB. He campaigned  for George W. Bush in 2004 as a member of the Boston Red Sox, and rumors about his own candidacy surfaced as early as 2008.  Schilling has previously found himself in hot water because of his status as an outspoken conservative. He was fired from his position as an ESPN broadcast analyst in April of 2016 after sharing an post questioning transgenderism on Facebook. When ESPN’s Jemele Hill avoided termination after calling President Trump a white supremacist, Schilling told CNN he was not fired for speaking his mind, but rather "for being a conservative." While it is unclear which seat Schilling will target, Arizona’s 1st congressional district, currently held by Democrat Tom O’Halleran, voted for President Trump in 2016.
Can Palestinians in Gaza Revolt Against Hamas?
by Khaled Abu Toameh
gatestoneinstitute.org } ~ Hamas leaders are scared. Of what? That Palestinians will return to the streets of the Gaza Strip to demand that their leaders govern rather than tyrannize... The living conditions of Palestinians in Gaza have gone from abysmal to worse. That is why the leaders of Hamas recently ordered their security forces to detain several Palestinian activists for allegedly planning  another wave of protests similar to those that swept the Gaza Strip earlier this year. Last March, Hamas security forces used excessive force to break up demonstrations held in various parts of the Gaza Strip under the banner "We Want to Live!" The demonstrations were organized by Palestinians to protest the longstanding economic crisis, including soaring unemployment and increased taxes imposed by Hamas on the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Dozens of Palestinians were injured and arrested during the demonstrations, including human rights activists and journalists. Hamas managed to crush the March protests, thereby drawing strong condemnations from many Palestinians who accused the rulers of the Gaza Strip of acting like ruthless dictators against peaceful demonstrators. Palestinian journalist and political analyst Hamadeh Faraneh said that Hamas has shown that it is not capable of ruling its people. "By resorting to repression and brutal force, Hamas has emerged as the loser," he said. Palestinian professor Abdel Sattar Qassam denounced the Hamas crackdown on the peaceful demonstrations as "disgraceful," while several commentators in the Arab world lashed out at Hamas's "policy of breaking the bones" of its critics. Hamas's rivals in Fatah, the West Bank-based ruling faction headed by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, also joined the chorus of critics. Osama Qawassmeh, a senior Fatah official, described the protests in the Gaza Strip as a "revolution of the hungry" against Hamas's corrupt and failed administration. Since then, the situation in the Gaza Strip has seen no improvement, mainly because Hamas cares a great deal more about investing millions of dollars in amassing weapons and preparing for war against Israel than about its own people...
Marines Declare Initial Operational 
Capability for JLTV
By Sam LaGrone
news.usni.org } ~ The Marine Corps is set to use its first Joint Light Tactical Vehicles in the field after the service declared the program had achieved initial operational capability earlier this month... The program, which will replace Marine and Army legacy Humvees, met the requirements to be certified by the Marine Corps Combat Development Command on Aug. 2, according to a release from the service. “IOC is more than just saying that the schoolhouses and an infantry battalion all have their trucks,” Eugene Morin, product manager for JLTV at the Program Executive Office for Land Systems, said in the news release. “All of the tools and parts required to support the system need to be in place, the units must have had received sufficient training and each unit commander needs to declare that he is combat-ready.” 3rd Battalion, 8th Marines was the first unit trained to operate the JLTVs, with more coming to the rest of the force by the end of the fiscal year. I Marine Expeditionary Force at Camp Pendleton and III MEF at Okinawa, Japan, are set to field JLTVs by the end of September, according to the announcement. The Marines plan to buy about 9,000 of the JLTVs, with up 300 entering service this year and up to 1,000 next year, USNI News reported in February. They include a combination of the general purpose, heavy guns carrier, utility and close combat weapons carrier JLTV variants. “The program office started delivering vehicles to the schoolhouses earlier this year and started delivering vehicles to the infantry battalion last month,” according to the news release. The IOC declaration comes as both the Army and Marines have been working through refining logistics and maintenance processes that the Pentagon’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation identified as deficient in a report earlier this year. The report was based on a joint Army-Marine Multiservice Operational Test and Evaluation (MOT&E) that was completed last year. Since the completion of the MOT&E, the Marines have worked to double the length of the training course and taken additional steps to lock down procedures for the new JLTVs separate from the Army effort. “We are really at the starting line right now. Our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will see JLTVs in the DOD,” LTV Program Manager Andrew Rodgers said in the news release. “We’ll easily still have these assets somewhere in the DOD in the year 2100. Welcome to the start of many generations of JLTVs.”
California Introduces Radical Anti-Semitic 
High School Curriculum
by Adam Kredo
freebeacon.com } ~ The state of California has introduced "blatantly anti-Semitic and anti-Israel" lessons into its official high school curriculum... drawing outrage and concern in the state's Jewish and pro-Israel communities, according to multiple sources involved in the controversy. The California Department of Education is facing backlash after permitting a host of anti-Israel activists to build a statewide educational curriculum that demonizes the Jewish state and is said to be fostering hatred of Jewish and Israeli-American students, sources said. Already, 83 pro-Israel and anti-discrimination organizations have petitioned the state's education department to reform its Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum (ESMC) to remove multiple instances of what they say is anti-Semitic and anti-Israel bias. Multiple sources involved in the fight have described to the Washington Free Beacon anti-Semitic courses that they say are fostering an unsafe environment for Jewish and Israeli-American students. Further information obtained by the Free Beacon reveals that several of the educators involved in pushing the new curriculum have a history of anti-Israel activism that has often spilled into anti-Semitic territory. "We are aware that many individuals and groups affiliated with the Jewish community have already written to you about the ESMC's shocking omission of information about American Jews and anti-Semitism, its use of classic anti-Semitic stereotypes, and its blatant anti-Israel bias," a coalition of 83 pro-Israel organizations led by the AMCHA Initiative, a watchdog group that combats anti-Semitism in America, wrote to California's Education Department...
Voter ID Opponents Lose Again This Time in North Dakota

Hans von Spakovsky

Opponents of election integrity lost the latest in a long string of cases recently when a three-judge panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated North Dakota’s voter ID requirement and tossed out an injunction that had been issued by a lower court.

In Brakebill v. Jaeger, Judge Steven Colloton, writing for the 2-to-1 majority, concluded that the supposed burden of obtaining an ID by the less than 0.5% of all eligible voters who do not already have one did not justify a statewide injunction that prevented the state from implementing the ID requirement.

North Dakota is the only state in the Union that does not require citizens to register to vote.

You can show up on Election Day and vote in North Dakota — as long you show identification.

The state Legislature passed a series of laws delineating the forms of identification that could be used to vote.

Effective Aug. 1, 2017, North Dakota required either a driver’s license, a nondriver’s identification card issued by the state Department of Motor Vehicles, or an “official form of identification issued by a tribal government to a tribal member residing in the state.”

The law requires the ID to provide the voter’s legal name, current residential address, and date of birth.

However, if a voter’s ID is missing any of those three items, the voter will still be able to cast a ballot if he provides the missing information with a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, or a check or other document issued by a federal, state, or local government agency.

Voters have up to six days after the election to present an acceptable ID or supplemental documents. Despite the fact that the lower court thought this provision would not be understood by the average voter, the appeals court noted that there was “no evidence of voter confusion over this provision.”

Six members of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians sued, claiming that the ID requirement restricted the ability of tribal members to register and exercise their right to vote, in violation of the U.S. Constitution, state law, and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The tribal members argued that “Native Americans often live on reservations or in other rural areas where people do not have street addresses; even if they do … those addresses are frequently not included on tribal IDs. Moreover … Native Americans in North Dakota are ‘disproportionately homeless.’”

Although it should be pointed out that all six of these plaintiffs actually have residential addresses.

The majority rejected the plaintiffs’ contention that requiring voters to have a residential street address is discriminatory, citing former Associate Justice John Paul Stevens’ opinion in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (2008), in which the Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s voter ID requirement.

A “residential street address furthers North Dakota’s legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud and safeguarding voter confidence, so unlike a poll tax, it is not invidiously ‘unrelated to voter qualifications.’”

The number of North Dakotans, just like the residents of other states, who already possess a photo ID is overwhelming. The court found that less than 0.5% of eligible voters in the state do not already have an ID or the supplemental documents that can be used to meet the ID requirement.

More importantly, the plaintiffs in the case presented no evidence whatsoever to detail how many of these “voters attempted to obtain a supplemental document and were unsuccessful.”

It was clear to the court that the state ID law did not place “a substantial burden on most North Dakota voters.” Thus, a “statewide injunction” was “unwarranted.”

The clamor around mythical claims of “voter suppression” over legislation like North Dakota’s ID requirement is misguided.

Such laws are designed and intended to shore up current deficiencies in the electoral system.

As pointed out in a recent study by the National Bureau of Economic Research, voter ID laws have no discernible effect on reducing the turnout of voters. Over the period 2008 to 2016, the researchers concluded that voter ID “laws have no negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any group defined by race, gender, age, or party affiliation.”

The purpose of North Dakota’s election laws is rooted in a desire to promote election integrity. Far from being a trivial concern, election fraud has been and continues to be an unfortunate part of American elections, as can be seen in The Heritage Foundation’s election fraud database.

Although election integrity measures such as voter ID requirements are often presented as a partisan issue, they should not be. Everyone has an interest in fair and secure elections.

As noted in a 2005 study by the Commission of Federal Election Reform, headed by former President Jimmy Carter and Secretary of State James Baker:

The electoral system cannot inspire public confidence if no safeguards exist to deter or detect fraud or to confirm the identity of voters. Photo IDs currently are needed to board a plane, enter federal buildings, and cash a check. Voting is equally important.  ~The Patriot Post

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center