LeviF

Get your JD from YouTube?

Which is a criminal offense. So, yeah, being rude could make the difference between signing an appearance ticket (and pinky swearing you’ll show up to court) and handcuffs.

It’s always this:

Lol enforcing immigration law = sick. You’re not supposed to say the quiet part out loud, silly.

It will require a strong stomach which the various “conservatives” have been demonstrated not to have. But it can happen. And it should.

"Papers, please." Aren't you one of those that says that the G should go door to door looking for guns? People tend to be bigger than guns, much easier to see!

Assuming that the moderate "mass deportation" position means the immediate effort to remove all illegal aliens, you use the same criteria for expedited removal that currently exists. Removals of this kind happen every day when the DHS Secretary isn't actively handcuffing ICE-ERO.

Your question is invalid and puts your ignorance of immigration law and practice on display for all.

Have you ever travelled internationally?

Mass deportation is the moderate position.

Every person in that video is prohibited federally (I assume) from possessing firearms. And the ATF is knocking on the doors of people who registered suppressors three years ago to make sure they didn't illegally transfer them. Priorities.

The Metamorphosis was published in 1915. I did not read your post.

They will when we deport them!

This is what I said. Neither state that only those of English blood are American. Exactly the opposite, actually.

Again, you and the actual doctor purposefully misrepresent and ignore the things I actually write. This isn't a closing argument, counselor. Frankly it's not even very serious but at the least you could engage with what I actually write rather than the mean scary xenophobic boogeyman you've set up in your head.

Considering the (British) act that preceded it we can almost certainly deduce that "good character" meant Protestant as well.

Your statement was that America was not founded as an ethno-nationalist state. The first, and several subsequent, Naturalization laws as well as the Constitution itself contradict this at least to some extent. We can argue to what degree that might be but your initial statement is categorically false.

The first time non-European aliens were made eligible for naturalization didn’t come until the 1830s. And it was some Indian tribe and came with some strings attached.

I can’t really speak to Trump’s genealogy, but ethnic Germans can be seen as cousins of sorts to the ethnic Americans in general. They assimilate just fine and have intermarried quite a lot with the old American stock. Again, ignorance of the history of the early laws of this country with respect to immigration especially is no friend. I’ve spoken to the heritage black Americans already in this very thread. If you can’t be bothered to read just say so and have done with it.

Again, citizenship is a legal matter we apply to people. Nationality is not, at least not in the historic use of the term. People that claim to be part of a sovereign nation within the United States should lay no claim to the term “native” except as applies to whatever failed state their parentage hailed.

It’s supported by both. The ignorance is yours. To you, nationality is an accidental fiction. Something that you can step into and out of. This is a fundamental philosophical difference that separates you from thousands of years of thinking on the matter. We can’t have a productive conversation about it.

No. They aren't. They are descended from the first settlers of this giant land mass but in most cases failed at statecraft. In the cases where they did not (say, the Aztecs), they were rightly and ruthlessly conquered. The "natives" of this country are those who are descended from the founders of this country (described above) and those that lived and assimilated among and with them in the 17th and 18th centuries. If you became a Japanese citizen through marriage and became entitled to the rights of a Japanese citizen, renouncing your US citizenship and permanently relocating yourself to Osaka, would you then consider yourself Japanese?

Then being "American" is pure accident, meaningless. And as far as they go, many of them "choose" to not be American. So why should they be able to lay claim to the term "native American?"

Which part is BS? Many of the so-called "indigenous" peoples maintain their sovereignty from the United States all the while attempting to reap the benefits of American citizenship, for all that's worth. Why would these people be Americans by any reasonable definition?

First, our respective understandings of the term "native Americans" is going to be wildly different. I'm going to assume that your definition is related to the descendants of the stone age peoples that crossed the land bridge that purportedly existed between what we now call Russia and Alaska. Some are, and some are not. Which sounds like a non-answer but is consistent with what I stated upthread. Careful reading should tell you that "America," as I speak of it, is not simply a land mass.