Clearly stated …

The Fourteenth Amendment , which spells out the basic qualifications for being eligible to vote in U.S. elections , contains references to both citizens and persons in the United States. This provides adequate justification for determining which persons are citizens. ( Justice Roberts doesn’t seem to agree. On the other hand, it doesn’t matter if the question is on the Census or not because illegals can just lie , as they did about seeking asylum ) What will be important and even crucial is to have a way to determine if a given person is a citizen at voting time.

From 14A , Section 2 : ” But when the right to vote at any election … is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age , and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged … the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.”

( Amendment 15 clarified that the right to vote shall not be denied or abridged on account of race , color , or previous condition of servitude , even though the 14A text didn’t say anything about those traits being disqualifying. Amendment 19 added ” sex ” [ not gender ].  Amendment 24 added failure to pay poll or other tax. )

So Amendment 14 in combination with 15 , 19 , and 24 makes it unconstitutional for any state to deny or abridge the right of citizens to vote in elections. There is no amendment that includes foreign nationals , legally resident or not , in the pool of eligible voters. They do not have the right to vote. And when they exercise the loopholes that allow them to vote and be counted , they potentially counteract the votes of legal citizens. Sounds like abridgment to me.

The reference to ” right to vote ” is limited not to protecting your right to go through the process of casting a vote , but to having the vote be fully counted , not just enumerated. When your vote is partially annulled by an illegally cast vote , your vote counts less. ” One citizen , one vote ” is the expectation , not ” one citizen , 0.999 votes.”

The only way to come close to ensuring that foreign nationals do not vote is to demand proof of citizenship at voting time. Motor voter laws let people register to vote when they get their driver’s licenses , and while some driver’s licenses ( Real ID and Enhanced Driver’s Licenses ) require and show proof of citizenship , sometimes the voter registration occurs anyway. According to this site , the Real ID act should mean that non-citizens cannot even get state-issued IDs or driver’s licenses. Yet they do. And not all states require that an ID be shown in order to vote.

We need to know who is not a citizen when it comes time to vote.  Personally , I’d like to see the Constitution amended to remove the dependency of representation on persons rather than citizens. Why should encouraging illegal immigration provide a political payoff ? Nor should states get more federal funds based on having more illegally resident moochers and job thieves.

We used to be a generous nation. At this point , we’re just a nation of chumps.

 

 

Source: Illegals voting is abridgment (of our votes) too far

We need more people to start being rational …

Right now Burger King is getting ready to offer “ Impossible Whoppers ” on their menu with meat removed from their most popular burger.

Meanwhile , Tim Hortons is offering “ Beyond Meat ” patties in certain sandwiches , and McDonald’s has a meatless burger on their menu in German locations …

Arby’s does not intend to give into this anti-American trend, and will continue in the opposite direction.

Arby is calling these products “ megetables ” and they plan to unveil more in the days to come. There are no plans as of yet to sell the items in stores , but these are their counter to fast-food giants adopting plant-based alternatives to corner the namby pamby market.

The first they have released to the public is the “ marrot ”, which is a meat product that is fashioned out of turkey breast sliced and shaped to look like a carrot. It is then rubbed with a marinade made of dried carrot juice powder and decorated with maple syrup powder.

Good for Arby’s !!! …

When lawyers smell meat …

Canadian citizens are invited to eat for free at an Ontario-based Chinese-Canadian restaurant chain this Canada Day , but legal experts say the offer may come with a side of discrimination.

Brampton , Ont.-based Mandarin Restaurant is celebrating its 40th anniversary with a free meal for patrons who can prove their Canadian citizenship.

” It seems a case of putting dim sum before dignity ” said Ted Flett , an employment and human rights lawyer with Toronto-based Zubas + Associates.

Critics of the policy are now calling out the Mandarin on Twitter and saying that forcing diners to prove Canadian citizenship to get  free stuff is un-Canadian.

” Just citizens ? What about the rest who pay taxes , work minimum wage and have sacrificed everything to live in this wonderful country ? Shouldn’t they also enjoy ? ” said one post.

Another Twitter user , @OskarBernard , wrote that the promotion doesn’t ” honour Canada Day ” and he’d ” rather pay to eat at someplace that doesn’t discriminate.”

What an excellent way to lose temporary and permanent resident clients ! I like to skip lines , so I wouldn’t celebrate my Canada Day on Mandarin anyways. Thanks for letting me know that I’m not welcome in your restaurant tho.

I am an international student and shame on your requirements , I will never come back to you even after get citizenship.

But @BlueskiesRobin , found nothing wrong about the promotion at all , writing ” I’m a proud Canadian and will be more [ than ] happy to show my proof. I think it’s great what they’re doing and I give two thumbs up.”

Interesting to note … This is the fifth year Mandarin has offered the free buffet linked to citizenship , wrote James Chiu , president and co-founder , in an email. Previously , diners redeemed the freebie in 1996 , 2004 , 2009 and 2014.

” This event is one of the ways for us to show our appreciation for Canada ” he said. ” Canada welcomed us into the country 40 years ago and has supported us ever since.”

Flett said he’s surprised this promotion has been offered four previous times as it sounds like a benefit to an exclusive group of customers , which appears to violate section one of the Ontario Human Rights Code. That section protects people from discrimination based on ethnic origin , citizenship and other factors in receiving services.

If Flett or a hypothetical client of his were refused the promotion because they were unable to produce proof of Canadian citizenship , he said he’d seek damages for the value of the offer , as well as damages for injury, hurt feelings and loss of dignity.

Source: Mandarin’s free Canada Day buffet for citizens panned as discrimination | CBC

News