Patterico's Pontifications

8/20/2015

Bobby Jindal Pushes Back On Planned Parenthood

Filed under: General — Dana @ 5:57 pm

[guest post by Dana]

From Gov. Jindal’s official website:

This afternoon, during the scheduled Planned Parenthood protest outside the Governor’s Mansion in Baton Rouge, Governor Jindal’s office will set up a movie screen and speakers and play on loop the videos of Planned Parenthood employees talking about the harvesting of unborn babies to sell on the open market.

Many Planned Parenthood supporters, including President Obama and members of the White House, said they have not or will not view the horrific Planned Parenthood videos. Planned Parenthood has a right to protest today, but Governor Jindal’s office will ensure that anyone who shows up will have to witness first-hand the offensive actions of the organization they are supporting.

Governor Jindal said, “Planned Parenthood supporters are welcome to protest. We will have a screen set up outside the mansion to display the Planned Parenthood videos. We hope the protestors will take a minute to watch them so they’ll have an opportunity to see first-hand our concerns with Planned Parenthood’s practices.”

If President Obama and other Planned Parenthood supporters, including Hillary Clinton, are so convinced of the good works of Planned Parenthood, why have they avoided watching the videos?

–Dana

HuffPo Legal Affairs Writer: Amending the Constitution Is Unconstitutional

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 2:55 pm

Cristian Farias at HuffPo:

Key figures in the crowded Republican field have spoken loud and clear about their desire to do away with birthright citizenship for the children of immigrants.

Donald Trump went a step further Tuesday when he said in a CNN interview that children born to immigrants under the present constitutional order “do not have American citizenship.”

In other words, the citizenship they were born with is invalid, a notion Trump said he’d be willing to “test out” in a court of law.

But one needs not go that far.

It turns out that the very idea of amending the Constitution to end birthright citizenship for the children of immigrants — a move that squarely targets Latinos — would probably be found unconstitutional.

That’s right. This guy thinks amending the Constitution is unconstitutional. He thinks that a 28th Amendment outlawing birthright citizenship would violate . . . the 14th Amendment.

One wonders if he thinks the Amendment undoing Prohibition was unconstitutional, because it violated the Amendment instituting Prohibition.

In case you’re wondering whether Constitutional amendments could ever be unconstitutional, feel free to read Article V:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

Since we’re past 1808, and removing birthright citizenship would not deprive a state of equal suffrage in the Senate, a birthright amendment could be passed.

Note well: This guy is not some random twit stopped by Jimmy Kimmel on Hollywood Boulevard. He is the “Legal Affairs Writer” for the Huffington Post.

Trust your media.

The True Conservative Choice is Ted Cruz, not Donald Trump, Part 2: Eminent Domain Abuse

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:42 am

The Donald does not care about your property rights:

For more than 30 years Vera Coking lived in a three-story house just off the Boardwalk in Atlantic City. Donald Trump built his 22-story Trump Plaza next door. In the mid-1990s Trump wanted to build a limousine parking lot for the hotel, so he bought several nearby properties. But three owners, including the by then elderly and widowed Ms Coking, refused to sell.

As his daughter Ivanka said in introducing him at his campaign announcement, Donald Trump doesn’t take no for an answer.

Trump turned to a government agency – the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority (CRDA) – to take Coking’s property. CRDA offered her $250,000 for the property – one-fourth of what another hotel builder had offered her a decade earlier. When she turned that down, the agency went into court to claim her property under eminent domain so that Trump could pave it and put up a parking lot.

Peter Banin and his brother owned another building on the block. A few months after they paid $500,000 to purchase the building for a pawn shop, CRDA offered them $174,000 and told them to leave the property. A Russian immigrant, Banin said: “I knew they could do this in Russia, but not here. I would understand if they needed it for an airport runway, but for a casino?”

P.S. “I knew they could do this in Russia, but not here” is an increasingly common phrase these days in the Russian community here in the U.S.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3252 secs.