In issuing passports to anyone with a birth certificate you participated in this process of willful misinterpretation. This has been the de facto position for a few decades now, and I'm sure that if you indeed worked for the State Department then you had instructions to do so. If you did.
But agency regulations and legal reality don't always meet, do they? Because the agency writes what it wants until somebody challenges it.
The citizens of foreign nations do not have the right to break into our country and then decide who the citizenry of the next generation will be.
Such a thing violates the concept of consent of the governed. We do not wish to be governed by the nationals of a foreign nation, and that is what the children of illegal aliens are. Don't believe me? Ask the government of Mexico, for example. They do in fact claim that such children are their nationals as well.
I agree. But I don't agree that they are "our" nationals as well.
No one in their right mind would.
Since you're so knowledgeable on this subject, you must also know that clarifying statutes have been introduced into the Congress since the early 1990's which defines "and subject to the jurisdiction". They have not gone anywhere because of Democrat (mainly) opposition.
They want the aliens to be able to vote for them, since they have lost the support of the Americans.
Eventually such a statute will pass. This is what the Congressional chattering class understands now.
So the debate will be over.
But just because you use swear words, epithets, and table pounding to try to convince the rest of us that some kid whose mother crawled under the fence from Tijuana to get to the hospital in San Diego is an "American" doesn't make it true.
Willful misinterpretation? Baloney. It is the law of the land until changed by Congress. Until Congress passes another law and amends the US Code, this "misinterpretation" obtains as it has for more than 6 decades. You can't unring a bell.
But agency regulations and legal reality don't always meet, do they? Because the agency writes what it wants until somebody challenges it.
Congress passes the law, which then forms the basis for agency regulations. Congress has never challenged this "misinterpretation" nor has any agency employee been charged with implementing them illegally.
Such a thing violates the concept of consent of the governed. We do not wish to be governed by the nationals of a foreign nation, and that is what the children of illegal aliens are. Don't believe me? Ask the government of Mexico, for example. They do in fact claim that such children are their nationals as well.
I am strongly for ending birthright citizehship [jus solis.] The only issue is how to end it. Congress can pass a law ending it citing the "misinterpretation" of the 14th amendment. More than likely, the law will be challenged and referred to SCOTUS. If SCOTUS upholds the new law, birthright citizenship is over. However, if they don't, then the next step is a constitutional amendment similar to what Ireland did a few years ago when it ended birthright citizenship, the last country in Europe to do so.
Until then, we continue to give citizenship to 400,000 anchor babies a year most of whom were born using Medicaid money and who will receive food stamps and other social welfare benefits. It is an insane policy, but I can tell you as a member of a grassroots immigration organization that lobbies on the Hill and in Richmond, this is going to be a very tough sell to get Congress to pass such a law. The other side is well funded and has strong political backing. The Democrat Party, La Raza, the Catholic Church, and others will fight tooth and nail to prevent any such law from being passed. and it is then