Originally, there were 13 sovereign states with the traditional power over immigration.

An accepted maxim of law? —  Not a law itself,  hmmm. Obviously couching the concept in the philosophy of legal positivism. If the "maxim" is of international law; what is stated by national law. An overview probably rates 5 stars.

It is interesting that Justice Roberts referenced a stare decisis of 100 years rather than an explicit verbiage within the Constitution. It is tradition for the head of government's executive branch to declare what it is going to enforce (whether of not Congress has formally made it regulation or even addressed the issue). It is a matter of usurpation, totalitarianism and tyranny for the 3 separate branches to treat such subject actions as law until overturned by one of the 3 branches. I'm not saying Trump's actions were unconstitutional (they were in my opinion beneficial to the nation), I just cant find that specific clause in the Constitution that legitimises the act.

With the Constitution's 9th and 10th Amendments (Bill of Rigts) in mind, please — anyone, show me the specific clause that gives to the U.S. federal government authority or power over the subject of immigration ! ! !  I seem to have missed or otherwise overlooked that clause. It is very clear the federal government has been given authority and power over the subject of citizenship and protection against State invaders (countries, organized groups {cartels, political organizations, religions, etc.} but NOTHING concerning immigration.  Maybe I'm wrong, please show me.

Ronw13, well said.

WOW !   I like it a lot.  the psychoses of hate and destructiveness is a driving mantra of socialists, neocons, the left & right and the occupying statist theocracy infesting this land. Patron slaves say give me enough to subsist on and it is all right if you hate and destroy individual sovereignty, inalienable rights and liberty at nature's law.

To the quote: amen, amen & amen

🤪 some of it has to do with the costs ;-)

Who wants? Informed? Patriotism? I would absolutely agree with a 10 star rating if I were defining; informed and patriotism. With Regan not doing much about the occupying statist theocracy infesting this land, especially with its compelled compliance, government licenses, victimless crimes, larceny with impunity (2nd plank of the communist manifesto, funny money, government confiscations, etc.) and a lack of recognition of individual sovereignty, inalienable rights and liberty at nature's law; — I'm not quite sure what he ment by this quote.

It can, I like it a lot

The only true, based on substance, chainmail strength and “wise” laws that create a noble nation are laws that fall within the realm of “the laws of nature and of nature’s God” (Declaration of Independence). Man’s (carnal god’s) philosophies (legal positivism, legal realism, etc.) called laws for demonic justification are in fact an encumbrance and stumbling block to the royal specie, man.

How is remedy here defined? Anon., I agree, force is generally short term. Police force, though it is used at times for justifiable benefit (short term), in most part it advances a continuing fear and obedience to malefactor totalitarianism.

Personally doing what is right, as it does not inflict another "IS" the beginning of liberty.

The dignity of man is a faculty of birth. Deserving honors or accolades are earned according to man's perceptions.

How many of the noble family even have a conscience conception of what liberty is. Liberty is innate in all of our Father's posterity BUT !!!, who can express an actual and true essence thereof or what liberty means. The occupying statist theocracy infesting this land, complete with its national establishment of religion proselytizes its enslaving false dogma; such as, compelled compliance, victimless crimes, government licensing, larceny with impunity (2nd plank of the communist manifesto, government/priesthood confiscations, etc.) along with non-recognition of liberty, inalienable rights or perfected allodium.

Anonymous: really short and to the point, how does your understanding of the Bible explain or coordinate 2 Corinthians 5:10, and Revelations 20:12, 13 (these 2 scriptures popped into my head as I recently used them in this blog),

My dream, stated differently but non-the-less equal in proportion, is that, any and all joint heirs with Christ / each and every progeny of the Eternal Progenitor sit down together in harmony with the anointed Prince of Peace / the King of love.

Further clarifying. Lincoln's government of, by and for the people was a socialist's mantra. A dejure representative republic is a government of law and justice, not people. Sovereign individual governments unite in accordance with an administration of law and justice.

For purposes of the quote: “Grace”, translates from the Hebrew masculine noun חֵן chên (Pronounced, khane) meaning; an affinity to righteousness, a propensity to uprightness, a palpable harmony with holiness, a nourishment of faith, knowledge, love, truth, etc. From a Greek translation, “grace” derives from the feminine noun χάρις cháris, (Pronounced, khar’-ece) which means; affinity to righteousness, a propensity to uprightness, abetted spiritual condition, Divine influence on the heart.

Though a righteous person may exist with grace generally and/or with a Divine influence on their heart specifically, the quote accurately depicts temporal life’s unpredictability and a fragility to the noble being’s circumstances. Bad things can happen to good people.

I like a broadly hypothesized scope of an overall observation. Does the benefit derive from a contract (agreed to formal obligation), a gift (how does one correspondingly if fact, repay a gift) or ...? OR, does identifying an original source even matter? 

🤣 I like it a lot, as far as observations go, extremely to the point accurate.

I here do give personal first hand testimony with spiritual "knowledge" that, the sojourner that is now called Jesus in scripture was/is my personal Savior.

I absolutely agree with you, the Divine sense and meaning of the term or concept “knowledge” is lost in translation by societal linguistics, scholastic endeavors / prejudices and corporeal use, etc.

It is my belief (which differs from faith and knowledge) that the tree of knowledge of good and evil held multiple purposes. To start the list; God’s will concerning freedom of choice / self-determination is a primal foundation of/to His progeny’s life (lives). I believe rights are inalienable to each noble family member and the best way to demonstrate the principle is to allow an inexhaustible choice between good and evil. The Hebrew feminine noun חֻפְשָׁה chuphshâh (Pronounced, khoof-shaw’) that translates into freedom literally means the right to choose (rights are more closely associated to justice than law). Though we will be judged for our acts (2 Corinthians 5:10, Revelations 20:12, 13, etc.) self-preference still reigns supreme. Even grace, though given freely, is received by freedom of choice.

ALSO, In Genesis 1:28; “God said unto them, "Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,” It is an observation of mine that, the “Garden” was of such a jurisdiction that children were not part of the equation? Procreation was of a lower, mortal or fallen state of being (transgression) but was a choice of Adam and Eve's. I also believe that from the greatest existences of intelligence and cognizance to the lowest (Celestial to man’s carnal existence), the greater fully comprehends the lesser while the lesser does not fully comprehend the greater. The fruit of the tree (literal and/or symbolic) was the methodology that the Lord chose for such transition. The prefix “re” added to “plenish” here doesn’t mean again but rather a furtherance of a Hebrew linguistic pattern used for emphasis. The Lord is here emphasizing being very fertile / fruitful and multiplying.

As to a talking serpent. Within the Garden’s jurisdiction, did other sentient beings speak? (-; I say hmmm??? dunno ;-) The Christ was known as a healer or Savior with other titles. “Save” and/or salvation is another term(s) that is lost in translation. The Hebrew verb חָיָה châyâh, or ḥāyâ (Pronounced, khaw-yaw’) literally, figuratively and causatively means: to nourish or give sustenance to survive, to keep or make alive (make whole or perfect). Every symbolism of Christ that I’m aware of has been replicated and used by the adversary. By example: The “rod of Aaron” had a snake carved around the almond staff with 2 red stones embedded into its eyes symbolizing the Christ. In Pharaoh’s court Aaron’s scepter was thrown down to become a serpent eating all the magician’s serpents. In the wilderness, Moses raised the scepter for all to see so that they be nourished and healed from serpent bites; etc. Why the symbolisms? I’m still learning, I don’t have that knowledge yet.  Too little, too much ? 😁

WOW, when Waffler makes a statement I completely agree with — ummm, it is amazing. Anciently, Hebrew words (nouns, adjectives, verbs, etc.) that translated into "knowledge" had meanings identifying knowledge as being finite, intrinsic with truth, love, faith and was the basis of wisdom. In other words, if that which past as knowledge did not include truth, love, faith and lead to real wisdom it was NOT knowledge but rather, just a gathering of falsely interpreted data, information, scholarly facts and figures, evidential findings, etc. Kudos to Waffler, is that religion or science. I submit, true religion and real science are indistinguishable. 

Jack, Holyoake's well publicized secularism is by definition a religion. His truth is as often as not, straight forward dogma. His anti-extra human experience is a shallow form of bigotry — not truth.