....The children of illegal aliens are most certainly NOT “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”, and are NOT US citizens by circumstance of birth on American soil.....
Anyone in the US, with extremely limited exception, is “subject to the jurisdiction therof.”
ANYONE born on sovereign US soil is a citizen without qualification. Now, if they can be President or not just may be litigated for the first time in over 225 years shortly.
Right, wrong or indifferent, children of illegal immigrants are citizens of the US, if born in this country.
Bah, sorry Chet. I think I responded to the wrong person, you.
I’m going to bed. This is making me dizzy.
ANYONE born on sovereign US soil is a citizen without qualification.
I refer you to post #11 from John Valentine, who can steer you toward the case law regarding this issue...
“Children of illegal aliens, if they are born in the United States, are U.S. citizens. That is in the U.S. Constitution.”
>>> "That is most certainly NOT in the U.S. Constitution.
Some people believe it is so because of a common misreading of the 14th Amendment due to a misunderstanding of the holdings of the Wong Kim Ark case. The fact is, this misreading of the 14th turns the amendment straight onto its head, and gives the Amendment precisely the opposite effect of that intended by its authors, Congress, and the ratifying States.
NO case heard in the Supreme Court has EVER held that birthright citizenship is granted under the 14th Amendment to the children of people in the United States illegally. Or legally, for that matter, if not admitted as immigrants." <<<
11 posted on Thursday, December 04, 2008 2:02:29 AM by John Valentine
Should I call you Mr. Big or is it Mr. Monkey?
In either case, the mistake you make is the same. You substitute your own, present-day, interpretation of the phrase "subject to the jusrisdiction thereof" in lieu of the meaning attributed to the phrase by those who wote it.
This ia a BIG mistake, because you render the phrase meaningless in the process.
In the minds of the congressional aauthors of the 14th Amendment, and in the minds of those State legislators who voted during the ratification process, the importance of this phrase was SPECIFICALLY to exclude the children of foreigners who were not citizens. You also overlook years and volumes of legal scholarship on this issue, and that makes you not very credible.
The Wong Ho Ark case extended the coverage of the 14th, quite without cogent reason, to the children of RESIDENTS, but it has NEVER been extended to the children of just ANYONE.
Your comments reveal you to be essentially ignorant of the subject matter, which is quite ok; it is the natural state of everyone before they acquire information. However, prior to making declarative statements that are incorrect and wrong-headed, it is usually better to do some research.
Here's a place to start:
http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship/misinterpreted.html
They certainly ARE, under current law. The thing for Congress to do (which it has refused to do so far) is to define "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" as excluding those in the country illegally. This would do an "end run" around the 14th, which was written to avoid declassifying blacks as "persons" and not to grant citizenship willy nilly to anyone here.....
However, in saying so, it is important to note that in the 19th century we had NONE of the ridiculous rules for entering this country we now have. The vast majority of the immigrant parents/grandparents of proud freepers who prate about "coming here legally" simply got on a boat with NO PAPERWORK AT ALL. Ellis Island (and scores of other immigrant sites) simply procesed them through, with papers or as WOPS (without papers, the origin of this Italian slur). The idea of passive eager immigrants lining up to get their "visa" outside the slovokian embassy is so idiotic as to be absurd.
Our immigrant problems are NOT the result of Mexican peasants who are lawbreaking goldbricks, eager to exploit our federal grabbag of giveaways. The problems stem from our welfare system and endless "programs" themselves. We are afraid to admit people who, even with unemployment tickling 7%, without whom large sections of our service industries would simply collapse. If we admitted them legally, they will be swarmed by "social" organizations pumping them to ride that gravy train. I have seen it happen.
Immigrations should be EASY to get here legally, and HARD to get here illegally. Once here legally, no "benefits" to non citizens. Of course, our federal gov't has the situation reversed. Natch.