Constitutional Key

Read in the Law in the Style of Lincoln: Hyperfocused with Constitutional Construction.

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

https://t.co/MhZOho42jy

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@dnieporent @BTKeener @kewhittington What is your reasoning for disagreeing with the term of art meaning not being put forth? What reasoning do you have that past courts are wrong, that have always said, it is about allegiance?

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@dnieporent @BTKeener @kewhittington That is not what I asked.

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@dnieporent @BTKeener @kewhittington Because it is in regards to whether allegiance is owed by the person, do you disagree with this?

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

Natural allegiance follows the person. Case in point: when an Englishman has a child in a foreign land, natural allegiance is still to the King, and he is still an Englishman, natural-born.

Lord Coke is bound by the law, and the law has bound itself that natural law cannot be altered by common law. Lord Coke then attempts to dissolve this natural allegiance, which is created by natural law, by setting forth common law, saying the child of an alien not inimicus, born in England, is subject to England, and attempts to dissolve the natural allegiance of the alien child to the nation where natural allegiance is held. Lord Coke has put forth that the natural allegiance of the alien's child can be dissolved by common law, and, in doing this, has made no common law at all, for the common law must follow the natural law.

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@OrinKerr The support of the Oath or Affirmation must be by what is manifesta, the law will not allow what is not direct in regards to this.

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@OrinKerr Incident to law is the principle Manifesta.

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@OrinKerr Typical, the court putting forth conscience in circumvention of the law.

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@marklevinshow I would not read Mr. Levin puts forth, Senate consent is not necessary to make a binding treaty.

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@ConceptualJames Senate still needs to consent.

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@Ne_pas_couvrir Your ability to criticize and be correct is exceptional, but I still stand behind my words in previous conversations.

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@ConceptualJames Have we not, have claim of who the leaker is?

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@Andreafreedom76 The senate still needs to appove:

"He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties"

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@marklevinshow The Senate still needs to approve.

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@JoshMBlackman Perfect reason, which the law, and once they separated equity from, really, the perfect reason required of law and equity answers all of this.

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

Funny, I like how you claim to be quite a good lawyer, but I have not seen anything from you other than that you are a glorified clerk—not saying you are, but from what I have seen. Further, being the good lawyer you claim to be, it is funny you had to be corrected by other lawyers here: https://t.co/SIum9lCiY5.

Also, if you want to adapt it to the words of the 14th, which is really not the correct construction when life and liberty of the people are of the matter, if a person can be born, then the person existed before they were beared. And further, in your claim, it would need to say, "nor deny to any person born, who is within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws," and those are not the words the framers chose.

[A.W. @Alexand16730477]

@dilanesper @RAHarrisonPA What you wrote and what he wrote are two very different things, and what he wrote didn’t take up that much space that you couldn’t have also said it originally. “I shorthanded it to be something entirely different” is BS.

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

If you think birthright citizenship is in the 14th, that is funny. Again, you don't seem to grasp that the court must pursue the Constitution, and not that the Constitution is to pursue the courts. You rely on the case method and have no understanding of the fundamentals of law, it seems, or you hide the understanding of the fundamentals for some reason...

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

Is the intent of the narrative being told honest, or is it a means to mislead people into a false understanding of history and science? Lex est sanctio justa, jubens honesta, & prohibens contraria. Emphasis with the law requires the jubens honesta, and any act of misleading, whether purposeful or not, cannot be commanded by the law.

[Constitutional Key @Key2Const_]

@ConceptualJames Trump and Congress did well capping College student loans.