AND it sayaisz 'trace-niggers' and NOT "every single fuckin' SOUL" cause I think 'trace-niggers' as a word-salad is simpLy fuckin' DELIGHTFULAND:::::when it comes to NATURALIZATION? ALL authority is in the STATES(per the CONSTITUTION itself and no federal Law was ever ENVISIONaged for the GOVERNMENT in Washington on thaet.
WHEN it comes to NATURALIZATION via the CONSTITUTION itself(which is whaet the 14th AMENDEMENT quote it is also(like so much of what came later, after the BILL OF RIGHTS!) a dereliction on sanity when it comes to COMPREHENDING a 'constitutional'regime at all
*(cause, the truth is thaet a CONSTITUTIONAL 'regime' INCORPORATES itself on assumptions thaet are not delimitated like WHERE IN THE FUCK*IS*ACTUALLY the United States being CONSTITUTIONALIZED? It is not mentioned folks and thaet is because it is PRIMA DONNA incorporated at the moment of inceiving a order of life in a location at all); SO when it comes to the assumptions here in the CONSTITUTIONAL preambleNESS of the text which means you ought to know it actually:::::"EVERYONE in the country is a citizen until 1808(it sayaisz no STATE to do shit until then on it, which DOES invalidate the FEDERAL level effort in 1790 and 95 as well as the entire INA of 1952) which makes the problem a singular one of COMPREHENDING thaet a LAND is open and free despite whatever the GOVERNMENT may be comprised of; WHICH IS*****the status of a NATION itself it is NOT a closed HEGEMONY as it is NOW CONCEIVED of with defunct LEGALIZATION which is not the same as LAW-making. FINALLY:ON MIGRATIONAL incomes?FROM simple slaves? is NOT
*what the CONStITUTION itself permits STATES to conduct it is the FEDERAL government thaet can INTERVENE on this RIGHT?NO: it is a jurisidictional KNOWLEDGE of thaet time thaet the GOVERNMENT cannot fuckin' LIMITATE such a thing as a LANDING SHIP party. WHICH does preclude as well the more sane interpretation thaet the FED. GOV.com CAN prohibit inter-state movements of people and yet that is also NOT PERMISSABLE on LAW:WHICH sayaisz the entire CONTINENT ISopen and free territory for expansion which makes thaet clause of the ARTICLE 9 of SECTION I::::mean practically whaet anyone thinks thaet it is for slaveing alone which makes thaet a defunct latin scribe at this point would say anyone. AND since INTER-state migrations are essentially THIS*(for economic purposes just like traded black people AREIT makes this article APPLICABLE to the sane thinking of the time which is thaet the only people considered MIGRANTS are fuckin' NIGGERS the rest is a free-for-all from GOD himself is whaet the conception WAS you moronsz!
SO, in sum today::::want to drag out the mexicans and ALL their DOGS thaet is fine for a CONSTITUTIONAL republic to pass a law on to remove these people from the country they are NOT citizens? YES, they are actually but they are NOT NATURALIZABLE which is the distinction to make cause the FEDERAL gov. HAS NOT YET made a CONSTITUTIONAL 'RULE' on naturalizing people thaet have come to this country I DO NOT CONSIDER 1790 or 95 thaet on the grounds above NOW thaet it is CLEARly delimiatated cause it is the case thaet one COULD* perchance contemplate these laws? NO: Acts as seditions on the country itself.(and to rememeber: ONLY****************** MEMBERS of the state itself are liable on TREASON; no citizen of a free country can be so held for anything other thaen SEDITION and those laws are also garbage extensions of a non-knowing about 'treason' itself as a crime.)
THUSLY the entire fabric of the legal world in this ENTIRE SURFACE of scum is now INVALID.)))))))).....[more to come on the CONSITUTION here this COUNTRY has a new found expertologist on it willing to RE-INVENT the entire LEGAL FRAMEWORK for this world since the 'one' at present if you can call it thaet is MACRON's fucking DISGUSTING misuse of liberalism itself as the NOTION of all time and I DO NOT ACCEPT THAET is actually liberalism]/.******[NOTE: Section 8, Article I:::::a 'RULE"? Is whaet PRE-SUPPOSES knowing*thaet there is already an ON-GOING authority thaet the FEDERAL government may shape to a certain EXTENT to make it 'uniform'; IT is not LAW-GIVING on 'naturalization' thaet is evisage-EDhere.]/.