Posted on 10/30/2018 2:48:25 AM PDT by be-baw
When the word “subject” is converted to a noun, then it all makes sense.
If you are born a “subject” of a country, then you are a citizen. The terms are interchangeable.
We don’t need a constitutional amendment about Birthright citizenship. The 14th Amendment already addresses it. It just needs to be interpreted correctly. This one has to go to the Supreme Court.
I wonder whether the “dual citizenship” issue might be the ticket on which this turns. We say we don’t recognize dual citizenship, but how is that really enforced? If someone is a U.S. citizen by birth, and another country allows them to obtain citizenship without renouncing their U.S. citizenship, as of now, what’s to stop them from doing so? But if the rule is (exclusively) subject to the jurisdiction of, then if someone is born here a citizen of another country, then that means they are not citizens here. Maybe.
Just read it again..
And I’ll have to agree with you. I guess, even back then, we had some activist judges.
I think the biggest hurdle is going to be the Left’s argument of, Jus Soli. Again, a courtroom decision, that has somehow become “settled law”, even though the judiciary does not have the ability to do so. But, then again, Kennedy did it and, of course, since it went the way the Left wanted it to, they didn’t burn down a city near you or me.
But for me, Birthright Citizenship is the one and only thing that keeps these people coming. They all know that they can’t get benefits, but the kids they give birth to, in a US hospital gets them all.
Well, I wasn’t planning on running anyway. Ha ha. That said, all men are created equal. In our political environment, some are more equal than others. Especially Democrats and illegal invaders.
Of course they “got it wrong.” That’s not the point. You and I may agree it is wrong but the reality is millions of people gain citizenship this way and only Congress can change this. The President is trying to make this happen finally! Cripes, what will you do if Congress doesn’t make this right - which is the odds-on favorite of what will happen? This crap should have been taken care of over a hundred years ago!
He wants the EO to prompt a Court case.
He does not believe he can overturn 50 years of jurisprudence with an EO.
“That they’re not the final arbiters on what is constitutional....”
The Supreme Court certainly is, unless you’re planning on passing the Constitutional Amendment.
New line
And the Supreme Court is now fairly conservative. Might be even more so by the time this subject. Trump is brilliant to be doing this right now.
The law doesn’t have to be fixed to include anything. SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF
Foreign Nationals, Aliens, and Diplomats are not subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
That’s the written intent provided from the writer of the 14th Amendment, in relation to that clause.
Well said
Seems to me Trump just dropped a MOAB of an October surprise the week before the midterm elections.
The Trump signature:
Game changer
Unexpected
Massive
The US is neutral on dual citizenship. There is no law opposing it.
It’s almost like, in the English language, a word can have two different meanings depending on context. That would mean the word “keep” could mean “hold” but also to mean “own” or “store” at the same time. That kind of language usage would never happen in an amendment!
“The Supreme Court certainly is, unless you’re planning on passing the Constitutional Amendment.”
Really? So we do live in a judicial tyranny...Your not alone in believing that. Baffling.
We can quibble about how long this policy has been in place, but actual practice has been the rule for a long, long time. Children presenting a US birth certificate to get a passport has been in place long before the 1960s. The citizenship and legality of the parents were not questioned.
It was only in 1856 that Congress decided that the State Department would be the sole authority to issue passports. Before that, the states and cities were issuing passports.
From 1789 through late 1941, the constitutionally established government required passports of citizens only during two periods: during the American Civil War (1861–1865), as well as during and shortly after World War I (1914–1918). The passport requirement of the Civil War era lacked statutory authority. During World War I (1914–1918), European countries instituted passport requirements. The Travel Control Act of May 22, 1918, permitted the president, when the United States was at war, to proclaim a passport requirement, and President Wilson issued such a proclamation on August 18, 1918. World War I ended on November 11, 1918, but the passport requirement lingered until March 3, 1921, the last day of the Wilson administration.
The contemporary period of required passports for Americans under United States law began on November 29, 1941. A 1978 amendment to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 made it unlawful to enter or depart the United States without an issued passport even in peacetime.
Even when passports were not usually required, Americans requested U.S. passports. Records of the Department of State show that 130,360 passports were issued between 1810 and 1873, and that 369,844 passports were issued between 1877 and 1909. Some of those passports were family passports or group passports. A passport application could cover, variously, a wife, a child, or children, one or more servants, or a woman traveling under the protection of a man. The passport would be issued to the man. Similarly, a passport application could cover a child traveling with his or her mother. The passport would be issued to the mother. The number of Americans who traveled without passports is unknown.
Today, primary proof of US citizenship to obtain a passport includes either a US birth certificate or a Consular Report of Birth Abroad or Naturalization certificate.
Do it Mr. President!!!!!!!! MAGA!!!!!
“You and I may agree it is wrong but the reality is millions of people gain citizenship this way and only Congress can change this.”
Well, only the ones born here to legal foreign nationals, anyways. They’re CINOs. Citizens in name only. Court created citizens.
I still don’t know how they’re handing out U.S. birth certificates to children of illegal aliens.
Funny … the only time I hear Healthcare as an issue is when I turn on the TV. I never hear it as an issue when talking to actual people. Oh, strike that, the benefits coordinator at my company told me we were changing plans at the end of the year … but that is about it.
I thought Ronald Reagan was the best president of my time here on earth....I amend that statement. DJT will go down as the best president of my lifetime. lol
The thread of logic has been derailed, you’re not responding to what I wrote and how I was responding to another post. And I’m not going to bother to explain it either. It’s not rocket science.
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.