Posted on 07/19/2015 3:07:00 PM PDT by artichokegrower
Excuse me, but you need to know about this, it is from the actual 14 Amendment of the USC:
Section 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. [emphasis added]
Those entering this country illegally are not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." This is most notable when they go to trial and cannot be sentenced to a punishment not allowable in their native homeland. Hence, those here as ambassadors and such that have children born in this country do not have children with US citizenship.
Our current problems with those here illegally go back to doctors and hospitals in California that found themselves with illegals giving birth and having no US identification. Without out such they could not issue a US birth certificate. Rather than let this stop them, they simply made up something and issued a certificate anyway. Now we have "US Citizen" children that are not really US citizens.
Yes, I'm a citizen. My ancestors can be traced back to the colonies, before there was a United States, or to Ellis Island, and they were naturalized. My Great Grandfather, who came through Ellis Island, also followed the rules, he was employed, had a sponsor here, and obtained his citizenship prior to sponsoring and bringing over his wife and children. They were also naturalized.
That's just it, I'm a citizen of New Mexico. Yes, I'm subject to Texas law, when I'm there, but I'm not a Texas citizen. Visitors are always subject to the laws of the jurisdictions they visit, but that doesn't make them citizens of such.
So, what does "Residence" mean to you, then?
We no longer have laws. We have the personal whim of government officials and judges ( elected and non-elected).
“subject to the jurisdiction thereof”
Ambassadors and their family have diplomatic immunity and therefore are not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
Illegal aliens are, which is why they’re a high percentage of those in federal prisons.
You are mistaken when you say they cannot be sentenced to a punishment not allowed in their home country, by which I assume you are referring to capital punishment.
AFAIK, there is no legal prohibition against such punishments, though there may be treaty provisions with individual countries that apply. I believe the state department often asks states not to impose the death penalty for purposes of good foreign relations. But I don’t think there’s any way to actually prevent a state from doing so.
But the fact that such a person is being tried at all indicates he is subject to, etc.
In any case, the legality of the parents has no inherent bearing on the citizenship status of the child. Possibly it should, but at this point it doesn’t.
That's great but he wasn't born to an American citizen. According to your linked source that means he couldn't have been an citizen, which means his children and grandchildren couldn't be citizens either. Just following the logic of your reference.
What part of "Naturalized" don't you understand? It's right there in the 14th "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof", and right there in my post.
"In other words, only children born to American citizens can be considered citizens of the United States since only a American citizen could enjoy the "extent and quality" of jurisdiction of an American citizen now."
Don't blame me if your cited sources say idiotic things.
Too bad. Go back to Mexico where you belong.
Time to tell the Mexican government that we’ll take strong action against them if they don’t do something to stop the flow.
Did you read the whole thing. Because tnaturalization is discussed at the link. The intent of the Fourteenth Amendment was never to confer citizenship by birth to those children who were born to parents who held allegiance to a foreign country.,
• be called to jury duty
• be drafted into the military
• hold public office -- IE: elected to the House, Senate, or similar publicly elected position
• be employed by the US Government (without stealing someone's ID)
• vote (legally, that is)
• get a social security card (legally, that is)
• or anything else a US Citizen can do without problems
That is why those here illegally do so much to conceal who and where they are. They want absolutely nothing to do with those attempting to apply the jurisdiction of the US to them and their loved ones' lives. BUT, they want all of the benefits of the CITIZENS of this nation without any of the accompanying responsibilities, to include said citizenship.
You think they are under our nation's jurisdiction, but, in truth, they are far from it. And our emperor is attempting to help them achieve their goal.
Under the jurisdiction does not mean one is a citizen. It means the government will, or should, enforce its laws on you.
I’m sorry, but you are mistaken. Being under jurisdiction is like being pregnant — you either are or are not. You cannot be both. Maybe in your world, but not ours.
One problem here is that when the 14th was ratified there were no illegal aliens.
There were no restrictions on immigration at all at the time, and no really significant ones till the 1880s and 90s. Some states had restrictions but they were declared unconstitutional in 1875.
Since there were no illegal aliens, the issue was obviously not considered by those who wrote the amendment.
The problem for you is that the law, as presently interpreted anyway, agrees with me, not you.
Feel free to get to work and get that interpretation changed. I don’t even disagree with you.
The US is, and always has been, jus soli for purposes of determining citizenship, as it was common law before the Revolution.
Just because you want all the minutia included in a law does not mean you get it. "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," is pretty specific, if you ask me. Other law already defines who gets to be a citizen and just being born is not a definition. At least one of your parents has to be a citizen already. I know, my father was one but my mother was not until I was three years old.
Those in this country illegally are not citizens, period. Therefor they cannot pass on a US citizenship. The children born of illegals are illegal themselves and are the problem of their parents, not the taxpayers.
You aren’t listening. That, possibly, is what the law should be. But it’s simply not the law as presently written and/or interpreted.
Your belief that the law is something else has no effect here in the real world.
I have to make an early start in the morning so I'll close this conversation with you. Best wishes and its been fun.
Ern
You are incorrect.
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.