14th Ammendment

Sec 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


Surely, yall are outraged over the President’s belief that he can circumvent the Constitution through executive order.

(10-31-2018 10:39 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  14th Ammendment

Sec 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


Surely, yall are outraged over the President’s belief that he can circumvent the Constitution through executive order.

Is this a serious question?

The issue is over the proper interpretation of, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," with respect to people here illegally. It's more interpreting than circumventing the Constitution.

I have sort of mixed emotions. I don't think children of illegals should get birth citizenship. But I'm not sure that we can get there under the amendment, as written. It does seem from quoted statements to be clear that the author of the amendment did not intend for it to be interpreted in a way to create the anchor baby problem. But it is a very tricky legal issue.

Educate yourself.

https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-mor...onal-right

“Senator Jacob Howard, the author of the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment – he spoke – he told us what he meant. He defined who would fall within the ‘jurisdiction of the United States.’ Ready?

“‘Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, [meaning the states – their jurisdiction] is, by virtue of natural law and national law, a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great issue in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.’

(10-31-2018 10:39 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  14th Ammendment

Sec 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


Surely, yall are outraged over the President’s belief that he can circumvent the Constitution through executive order.

Where does it say anything on that article in regards to the President?

Quote:Where is the outrage from strict constitutionalists?

All over. Including here.

But you knew that.

Let the Supremes take a whack at it.

(10-31-2018 10:41 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 10:39 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  14th Ammendment

Sec 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


Surely, yall are outraged over the President’s belief that he can circumvent the Constitution through executive order.

Is this a serious question?

Especially considering the left sat by and said nothing for the 8 years the Chief Circumventor was in office.

I'm sure it boils down to the lefties being afraid that SCOTUS will rule in a manner that they don't agree with and there will go all their future "D" votes.

(10-31-2018 10:49 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

Quote:Where is the outrage from strict constitutionalists?

All over. Including here.

But you knew that.

Yeah, myself and many others were outraged that he'd try to do it by executive order. I think it is a legitimate constitutional question however whether the children of illegals are entitled to birthright citizenship and the supreme court needs to clear it up.

(10-31-2018 10:39 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  14th Ammendment

Sec 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


Surely, yall are outraged over the President’s belief that he can circumvent the Constitution through executive order.

People residing in the USA illegally, and the women who lie on tourist visa apps about being pregnant so they can have an anchor baby, etc., they are their babies are Mexican, Chinese, Russian, Honduran citizens etc. Government "policy" has been to grant anchor babies citizenship, hopefully this policy will change soon.

But to your other point, yeah end DACA with an EO and deport them.

(10-31-2018 10:53 AM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 10:49 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

Quote:Where is the outrage from strict constitutionalists?

All over. Including here.
But you knew that.

Yeah, myself and many others were outraged that he'd try to do it by executive order. I think it is a legitimate constitutional question however whether the children of illegals are entitled to birthright citizenship and the supreme court needs to clear it up.

And an EO is one way to initiate that process.

The 14th was included, in part, as a buttress to the Civil Rights Act of 1866 which focused on ensuring blacks were honored as citizens of the US.

One can, at least, make an argument that the clause "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" requires the parents of US born children to be in the US under legal circumstances.

The only real Supreme Court case (Wong Kim) dealt with a child of Chinese parents who were in the US legally under a type of official work visa.

Certainly, any case involving children born in the US to foreign parents not here legally in the US is distinguishable, at least from the facts in the Wong Kim case.

It it needs to be addressed, and I don't care who gets the ball rolling on it.

(10-31-2018 10:53 AM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 10:49 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

Quote:Where is the outrage from strict constitutionalists?

All over. Including here.

But you knew that.

Yeah, myself and many others were outraged that he'd try to do it by executive order. I think it is a legitimate constitutional question however whether the children of illegals are entitled to birthright citizenship and the supreme court needs to clear it up.

I agree. There are plenty of constitutional scholars that agree that this needs clarifying. It has never actually been taken up by the court. We need to have this settled once and for all. If they uphold it?...Fine. Then the process of a constitutional amendment would be the next step if wanted.

It already has accomplished what The Donald wanted it to. His statement brought immigration back to the front of the discussion. He is miles ahead of the lbs, as usual.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(10-31-2018 10:59 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 10:53 AM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 10:49 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

Quote:Where is the outrage from strict constitutionalists?

All over. Including here.
But you knew that.

Yeah, myself and many others were outraged that he'd try to do it by executive order. I think it is a legitimate constitutional question however whether the children of illegals are entitled to birthright citizenship and the supreme court needs to clear it up.

And an EO is one way to initiate that process.

Yep. We have short memories. This was one of Trumps campaign issues. It is another item on the list that he is checking off. I guess this is as easy a way to get the ball rolling as any. I have to give him credit that despite my not liking a lot of his rhetoric and methods...I appreciate him living up to campaign promises.

Fwiw... from where I sit, McCarthy speaks for many of us strict constitutionalists with this article...

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/do...ive-order/

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Then maybe all of the Asian women including RUSSIAN women will stop going to the Marianas to have their little American citizen babies.
Dual citizenship babies in the Marianas

If parents are here legally, then the kids are born citizens. If they are not here legally, they are not born citizens. The end.