The result could not be even remotely legal, so how can the proposal go forward?
The name “Puppets not People.” Would be more apt.
Proposal 2 of 2018 is one of the most bizarre creations to be tested before the voting public. Several pages of changes to our state constitution without the benefit of a convention, and a significant change to state government through a vote where maybe TWO or THREE percent of voters will have a full understanding of the changes being made.
The Michigan Supreme Court failed miserably in stopping what amounts to a coup of Michigan’s constitution.It should immediately review and recall its decision, or face future docket challenges it cannot meet.
The mess this proposal will create is undeniable. Literally prepared for court battles, the proposal inserts language into our constitution that authorizes the commission to ‘prosecute’ the legislature for financial ability to defend itself against expected redistricting challenges. What this means is that unlimited taxpayer dollars will be used to fend off any taxpayer disagreements with whatever crazy apportionment happens.
This ‘clever’ bit of political takeover quite frankly takes the power AWAY from the people of Michigan. The Orwellian name ‘voters not politicians’ gives certain political influences (through social media and misinformation) more of a permanent grasp on the political mechanics, with little or no chance for timely corrections.
We continue his essay with executive law, congressional acts, and some historic background.
by James Fuscaldo (continued)
Executive / Administrative Policy on Birthright Citizenship
Advocates for granting automatic citizenship to children born to illegal aliens or temporary nonresident aliens (guest workers) living in the United States always focus on the first requirement of birth.They allege birth on United States soil alone guarantees United States citizenship. These advocates also argue that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” simply means being susceptible to police authority (i.e. being required to follow American laws, pay fines for violations and be subject to the police powers of the Federal and State Courts). This interpretation creates a redundancy in the Fourteenth Amendment.
All people born in the United States are subject to the laws of the United States. Accepting the argument that the phrase, “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”, simply means subject to police power turns a critical and carefully written Citizenship Clause of the Constitution into a redundancy. It also gives the Clause an interpretation that is contrary to the recorded Congressional debate before its adoption, and to the principles of legislative construction and interpretation.
We can continue to ignore the intent to clarify what constitutes being a citizen or ..
We continue to have a problem.
The people who violate our sovereignty are here. The children of immigrants are assumed to be a way to maintain an illegal presence in our country by these invaders from foreign lands. In that process, the constitution is used to serve excuses for the law breaking. Michigan attorney Jim Fuscaldo clarifies a few things in “A Citizen’s Primer on the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
By James J. Fuscaldo
James Madison said, “Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”
Congress is debating the need for comprehensive immigration reform. The reason is to deal with illegal immigration; manage the growing number of illegal immigrants in the United States, and create an equitable path to permanent residency and citizenship for all illegal immigrants and their families in the United States.
An essential part of United States immigration policy is based on the executive branch’s current practice of granting birthright citizenship to children born in the United States whose parents are either illegal aliens; a temporary nonresident alien (guest worker) living in the United States, or aliens lawfully in the country for a limited time and purpose.
Birthright citizenship is not authorized by the Constitution or congressional legislation. It has not been validated by any Supreme Court or Appellate Court decision. Constitutional scholars and eminent jurists have studied the historical record; the congressional debate before its adoption; the case law pertaining to the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and its association with our English Common Law heritage. They have concluded that granting birthright citizenship to children born in the United States whose parents are either illegal aliens or temporary nonresident aliens (guest workers) living in the United States, or aliens lawfully in the country for a limited time and purpose is not supported by the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Before analyzing the historical significance and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment it is incumbent on us to first consider a review of the Thirteenth Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1866 as evolutionary precedents for the Fourteenth Amendment.
Fact is, there is no inequality to start with. Consider that simply because marriage is between one man and one woman, it does not exclude those who are of a different sexual orientation from enjoying that same privilege, or right. They can still do so within the definition established by we the people of the state of Michigan!