Posted on 08/16/2015 12:42:58 PM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
This is another stupidly worded Amendment that is DELIBERATELY being misinterpreted.
“The clause’s author, Senator Jacob M. Howard of Michigan, phrased it a little differently.
In particular, the two exceptions to citizenship by birth for everyone born in the United States mentioned in the Act, namely, that they had to be “not subject to any foreign power” and not “Indians not taxed”, were combined into a single qualification, that they be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, and while Howard and others, such as Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lyman Trumbull of Illinois, the author of the Civil Rights Act, believed that the formulations were equivalent, others, such as Senator James R. Doolittle from Wisconsin, disagreed, and pushed for an alternative wording.[11]-WIKI
Aliens in the Unites States illegally are still subjects of a foreign power.
England makes it clear that children of NON-CITIZENS ARE NOT
BRITISH CITIZENS
If you were born in the UK on or after 1 January 1983
You don’t automatically get British citizenship if you were born in the UK.
If you were born on or after 1 January 1983, you’ll be a British citizen if your mother or father was either:
a British citizen when you were born
‘settled’ in the UK when you were born
In most cases you’ll be a British citizen if your mother or father was born in the UK or naturalised there at the time of your birth.
If you were born before July 2006, your father’s British nationality will normally only pass to you if he was married to your mother at the time of your birth.
If your circumstances are more complicated, you can get more information about British citizenship.
https://www.gov.uk/types-of-british-nationality/british-citizenship
“and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is the kicker. Children of citizens of other nations are subject to the jurisdiction of those other nations, not our own. This is why embassies protest maltreatment of their citizens abroad, and why a person can be held accountable for breaking a US law while in another country, because it is the nation of citizenship which has the jurisdiction over the individual.
Thank you. I have always had a difficult time understanding how “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” meant a baby born here was automatically a citizen.
Hopefully Congress will clarify that at some point. A baby is subject to the jurisdiction of it’s parents, not to the laws and courts of the land.
Now let's see how the other candidates respond to this!
Yes.
How about we try actually enforcing the law for once?
I agree. I think this court would uphold anchor babies under the 14th amendment by at least 7-2.
Or one can act like “Build a wall. Raise the ramparts. Deport them all. Arrrrrgh...”
At least this session I feel there’s some real decent choices. Trump, Cruz, Walker.
We are losing our country. I live in Texas & it’s unbelievable how much it has changed in just the last few years. I’m tired of being being these pregnant invaders with their Lone Star cards (food stamps). My school taxes are through the roof. The property taxes aren’t far behind.
If the illegal alien parents are from Mexico then the new baby born here is Mexican..a citizen of Mexico...
Regrettably, you are mistaken.
Regardless of where the parents are from, or the circumstances of their presence on American soil, a child born on American soil is an American citizen.
That judgment is based on a SCOTUS decision regarding the 14th Amendment.
Consequently, it will take a SCOTUS decision or a Constitutional Amendment to change it.
You are correct that the children are also Mexican citizens at birth, due to the nationality of their parents. But, the fact remains, they are also American citizens by virtue of their birthplace.
> allowing in only “the good ones.”
Fatal flaw.
And again, Trump leads the discussion and sets the talking point for the week.
ACES!
The GOPe are attacking Trump more than the democrats. That should say all that needs to be said. We are sick of RINOS!!! We gave them the House in 2010 they gave us nothing, they gave us RINO Romney who didn’t even try to win in 2012. We gave them the House AND Senate in 2014 and they have done NOTHING!!!
I will never ever vote for a GOPer again! Never. The hatred coming from the country club repubs at the National Review and WEAKly Standard says all that needs to be said. Their choice RINO Jeb is in big trouble. We conservatives have had it!
Thank you Jim for all you have done giving us a place to vent our frustration and allow us to support Trump without being banned. That is what all of these so called Republican websites are now doing in the comment sections. Banning anyone not kowtowing to Jeb and the Chamber of Commerce.
NO MORE RINOS!!!
The right words must be used in this fight or a GOP candidate can potentially get relegated to being called a carnival barker or a demagogue.
=============================================================, he’s been called that already, and worse, and be is double digits above all other candidates and will continue to rise at this rate. I don’t think he really cares what he’s called by pundits, media types or those of us who sit at oor keyboards worrying about candidates looking to boorish.
All well and good but it doesn’t answer the questions that I raised.
Yup, that is my guess as well. Of Alito, Thomas and Scalia, we might get 2 of 3. And that is a best case scenario. Just as likely we only get 1 of those 3 (maybe none). We basically need 4 or 5 solid originalist, conservative justices.
I would trust a President Cruz to nominate the right kind of justices that this country needs. I would not trust Trump to do the same.
Like it or not, a big part of picking presidential nominees is what kind of judges they'd nominate. I'd rather have a consistent conservative who understands these issues than someone who, at best, is new to the cause.
So how does letting the “good ones” back in comply with federal law?
I am not a Trump fan but rather a Ted Cruz supporter ... however this is incredible. Dems always hide behind children and Trump says deport them. Love it!!
The man has courage .. at least in his statements. No telling whether any of this would actually happen if he won the Presidency. But more importantly to me this signals Trump’s willingness to touch so-called sacred rails and then just drive a 2 ton flatbed right over them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.