Nianello6

@unlimited_ls These clowns are as soft as cotton.

News anchor covering shooting in Minneapolis says an agent sprayed her in the face with a chemical

@MatrixMysteries Amassing that much private student debt was an enormous, and enormously dumb, luxury.

An American is 24 years old — and already $205,000 in DEBT. No luxuries. No house. No savings. $550 in rent. $2,373 in student loans. $758 on a car and insurance. $4,015 every MONTH just to survive. This isn’t irresponsibility. It’s a generation buried before it starts.

@unlimited_ls Beautiful timeline cleanse.

NEW: The carjacking suspect who was run over and shot to death by police after shooting a sergeant has been identified San Jose Police Chief Paul Joseph identified the suspect as Mohamed Husien, 30 Joseph said the suspect’s crime spree began Jan. 17 in Sacramento, where he allegedly stole a red Corvette He then traveled to the Bay Area and carried out multiple robberies across jurisdictions Authorities say he later carjacked a green Corvette at a San Jose auto mall

@AlBuffalo2nite This is a hard one. Society can't be responsible for monitoring every choice made by every citizen. That said, it should strive to make publicly available and readily accessible a criminal history like his. Can we do better there? And can we teach people to be more wary?

She met him through Uber. She was never told he was a registered sex offender. She was never told he had just been released after 27 years for rape, kidnapping, and gun crimes. She was never told she was letting a predator into her home. Nine months later, she and her 14 year old daughter were brutally stabbed to death in their apartment. More than fifteen stab wounds each. A child. A mother. Gone. The man who did it had a public record. The registry knew. The system knew. The internet knew. But the woman he dated did not. This is what happens when society hides predators behind excuses. This is what happens when violent history is reframed as “mental illness.” This is what happens when accountability is replaced with compassion theater. Mental illness is not why a woman and her child were butchered. A violent offender was. A system that releases monsters without warning families was. A culture that lies to protect narratives instead of lives was. Women deserve truth. Children deserve protection. And the public deserves honesty. Stop erasing violence with labels. Stop calling predators misunderstood. Stop pretending this is normal. Two lives are gone because the truth was buried… again. #SilentMajoritySpeaks #AStoneGroove

@ThatMischaela @navyhato Nonstop whining from people who have in fact known nothing but privilege.

I love how non-Natives go down the path of “you don’t look 100% Native” so you don’t experience racism…why the special privileges? And never stop to consider the way our great grandparents and grandparents were subjugated that still impact our family wealth and prosperity today. Something of an IQ test. It’s not about phenotype based racism, you geniuses. It’s about realizing someone who is 1/4 Native…has had multigenerational centuries long familial disadvantages due to a Native bloodline.

These Australian aboriginals have beaten the odds to become junior doctors.

"I listed many other titles." None of which are mentioned. Anyway, you've annoyed me sufficiently that I'm going to mute you. Let's wait to see how SCOTUS goes by 7/26. I think 30-40% chance they essentially uphold the Trump EO, 50% chance they punt it to Congress, and 10-20% chance they endorse the sweeping BR citizenship view that you claim as inherent in the 14th.

@nianello6 @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway I didn’t say children of ministers. I listed many other titles.

The government's birthright brief has been filed. The most impressive part, which I hadn't fully appreciated since my focus has been the common law, is the sheer number of commentators who presumed for decades that temporary visitors didn't qualify for birthright citizenship:

@derShasta @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway "Consuls" too.

@derShasta @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway Who are "citizens of a foreign state born in the United States"? And as an example, are the children of Mexican citizens born in USA citizens of Mexico?

@nianello6 @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway …of the U.S. if they are a citizen of a foreign country. That SCOTUS quote is wholly consistent with what I am claiming. Subject to the jurisdiction means they are bound by U.S. law. If you are subject to a foreign state, you are bound by their laws, not U.S. laws.

@derShasta @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway I mean I cited it already. Note the "and" too.

@nianello6 @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway Show me a SCOTUS case which is not consistent with what I just said about the quote from Howard. Go

@derShasta @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway "YOU are the one that just claimed that there was a SCOTUS decision that contradicts...." No, I say the case of US born children of aliens present in USA in contravention of its laws and without its consent is one of first impression. That's why SCOTUS is taking the case.

@nianello6 @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway I don’t need to do that. I’m not claiming there is one. YOU are the one that just claimed that there was a SCOTUS decision that contradicts what I’ve been saying about the 14th applying to the children of immigrants. So where is it? Let’s see it.

@derShasta @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway So, why did SCOTUS write that they were, almost 30 years after the 14th Amendment? Shasta today understands the meaning of "subject to a foreign power" (as enacted in the Civil Rights Act of 1866) better than SCOTUS did?

@nianello6 @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway Can China send agents into the U.S. and arrest Chinese citizens? NOPE Clearly Chinese citizens on U.S. soil are not subject to Chinese jurisdiction.

@derShasta @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway You began by saying that immigrants aren't subject to a foreign power. Then when confronted w/the language of SCOTUS showing at least some were in its view, you gish galloped onto a different aspect of the issue. You're not interested in honest debate.

@nianello6 @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway The language I highlighted was designed to show that immigrants who immigrate to the US are subject to U.S. jurisdiction and thus their children, who are born in the U.S., are citizens of the U.S. under the 14th Amendment.

@derShasta @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway No. Not the fair reading of the language at the time, and not consistent w/the interpretation of SCOTUS - who of course had access to the legislative history that you've seen - just a few years later in the Slaughterhouse Cases.

@nianello6 @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway There is no difference between them. He is reiterating. It’s like saying “this will most affect old people, the elderly, who rely on social security, …”

@derShasta @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway You're conflating different categories. The language you highlighted was designed to distinguish Chinese, who were specifically EXCLUDED from immigrating to USA after 1882 w/other aliens who also didn't enter USA contrary to law.

@nianello6 @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway

@derShasta @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway "Immigrants to the U.S. aren’t subject to a foreign power." Yet the Supreme Court in your favorite case explicitly wrote that Wong Kim's parents remained "subjects of the Emperor of China" despite having built a business in SF over the course of at least 20 years. 🤔

@nianello6 @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway Immigrants to the U.S. aren’t subject to a foreign power. They are subject to U.S. jurisdiction because they are in the U.S. and not diplomats. Now you are arguing that the 14th Amendment doesn’t apply to the child of ANY immigrant. 🙄

@derShasta @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway What is the difference between "foreigner" and "alien" there? And there are two relative clauses. 18th and 19th century written American English didn't always conform to the 20th century Chicago Manual of Style, as revised, lol.

@nianello6 @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway That’s not three different categories of people. It is ONE category of people. There is no “or” or “and”. It is one category with a relative clause to specify that category.

@derShasta @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway The authors of the 14th Amendment were the same people who authored the Civil Rights Act of 1866.

@DocGrace @nianello6 @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway You realize that the founders, people like Jefferson and Washington, were NOT the authors of the 14th Amendment, right?

@derShasta @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway You can't read I guess. I even color-coded the three different categories being excluded (note the repetition of "who" there). You're not even honest to the language.

@nianello6 @DocGrace @ilan_wurman @MZHemingway Exactly It excludes foreigners who belong to the families of ambassadors. It includes EVERY OTHER class of persons.