Posted on 08/22/2015 7:31:37 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
the whole 14th needs to be thrown out. it is a mini Constitution that created the “United States” as opposed to a united several States.
Raise the kid to be a Conservative.
I disagree on all three points.
We have seen the courts support Administration initiatives through some pretty tortured reasoning.
I sincerely doubt congress could withstand a "Megyn Kelly" backlash from the voters on a new President's signature issue.
And finally, I would not put it past Trump to pull an FDR on an intransigent SCOTUS.
Riddle me this: are babies born to foreign nationals who are visiting automatically US citizens?
There was a generally unchallenged opinion at the time to base “birthright” citizenship on a determination of the rights of the children of Chinese laborers brought in to build the western end of the Union Pacific railroad, who then later returned to China with their children who had been born within the United States.
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that practically everyone born in the United States, except American Indians, were U.S. citizens. The difference is, that the Chinese parents had been within the United States territory for purposes of permitted labor, then had returned to China when the work ended, taking with them the children born here.
There was, for many years, a policy of exclusion of Chinese from the United States, and a number of them were expelled and forcibly sent back to China. The earthquake that destroyed much of San Francisco (1906), also destroyed the official archives of records, and many Chinese slipped in relatives because these were “paper sons” that had been born back in China, but claimed for US birth.
Two wrongs do not make a right.
Faced with such vague rationalizations, the US Federal government took a much more lenient view of “Birthright Citizenship” than would have otherwise been applied. The concept has NEVER been fully tested in court.
RE: Levin did what to it?
Mark Levin said that people are getting the clause “Subject to the Jurisdiction” wrong, “Because they’re result-oriented. Because they want to insist the Constitution says what it doesn’t say.
Levin argues that the Supreme Court has never ruled that the children of illegal aliens are American citizens. So the Supreme Court never ruled, even if they did, it would be wrong.
The clause speaks for itself, the author of the clause made it abundantly, unequivocally clear, ‘All persons born or naturalized in the United States.’ Let’s stop there.
If it means what the proponents of birthright citizenship say, it would stop right there. ‘All persons born or naturalized in the United States’ are citizens. There’s no need for anything else, but that’s what it says. Then it says, and, ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’
Now, you have slip and fall lawyers, some phony constitutional lawyers, they have ‘Esquire’ after their name, they come on TV, they go all over the place, ‘Jurisdiction means geography.’
Jurisdiction has nothing to do with geography. zero. It had to do with POLITICAL ALLEGIANCE to the United States of America. How do we know it? Because they said it.
And they also excluded everybody that the left, and some of the Republicans want to include.
Now here’s the good news, there’s another part of the Constitution. It’s Article I, Section 8, Clause 4. Here’s what that says, in plain English. ‘The Congress shall have power to…establish a uniform rule of naturalization.’ Now, you know what that means, that means Congress, not the courts, not the president, not ICE, it means the United States Congress has the power to regulate immigration in this regard.
And in the 1920s, that’s exactly what it did. The 14th Amendment excludes Indians, that is Native Americans, as US citizens, because they felt that they had allegiance to their own national tribes.
Then it was in 1923, Congress reversed course, and said, ‘You know what? Under the 14th Amendment and under this Article I, we’ve decided to grant citizenship, national citizenship to all Native Americans.”
We don’t have to amend the Constitution, it says what we say it says, and by statutes, by statute, going forward, prospectively, Congress can, in fact, say, ‘We want to emphasize to this federal government, to this president, no, you cannot make children of illegal aliens American citizens automatically.’”
Congress is hopelessly corrupt and will never - I mean NEVER - take illegal labor away from their sugar daddies.
They make $174,000 a year and they all retire multi-millionaires.
RE: Riddle me this: are babies born to foreign nationals who are visiting automatically US citizens?
YES. I know of a family who went to Eugene, Oregon from the Philippines as TOURISTS for 6 months.
The wife then was a month before labor. The child was born a month after they arrived and was deemed a US citizen.
Guess what the child’s name is? EUGENE.
This is a false and ignorant statement; that is, it is an unsupported assertion. You need read no further...
This involved the child of Legal Permanent Residents, not illegal aliens. Yoo may be a lawyer but he has his facts wrong.
They may not have a choice. They're not the branch tasked with enforcement.
Why bother reading National Review anymore? Article after article is GOPe surrender trash.
Every year for more than a decade bills have been introduced to eliminate birthright citizenship, sometimes with up to 100 sponsors.
I haven’t heard Trump “picking on certain ethnic or national groups” as the article suggests.
Ted Cruz is being ingenuous. He would really not discuss the issue of birthright citizenship. Someone should ask him if he supports David Vitter’s bill to eliminate birthright citizenship, a bill that has also been introduced in the House by Steve King.
RE: Why not pass the bill introduced by Steve King in January, HR 140, to eliminate birthright citizenship and see what happens if it gets legally challenged.
Not IF, my friend, WILL. IT WILL 100% be legally challenged as soon as it passes.
Millions of illegals and their friends will put this to the courts until it reaches the Supreme Court.
Here’s my guess as to how it will turn out.
FOR BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP FOR ILLEGALS:
Kagan
Sotomayor ( OF COURSE, just pronounce her name )
Breyer
Ginsburg
Kennedy ( Mr. Gay Marriage himself )
Robert ( Mr. Obamacare )
Result: 6-3 in favor of the illegals.
A valiant but futile effort.
Did anyone ask Trump what sort of Justice he would appoint to the SCOTUS yet?
Intereesting how most of these articles are written by either Asians or Latinos. Any one else noticed that? Gee, I wonder if these were Russians or Europeans . . . or Africans . . if they’d feel the same?
But hey Professor, since when now does “plain meaning” mean “plain meaning”? You know, when “state exchanges” and “federal exchanges” somehow mean the same thing?
Is the First Amendment absolute? Then all “hate speech” “fighting words” slander, libel, defamation are all unconstitutional, right? Hey Professor, you’re silent here, speak up.
Oh yeah, and there is that little thing you liberals like to ignore when it’s not in favor, and plead for it when it is . . .”intent” So Congress wanted the post Civil War Amendments so we could continue bringing cheap labor here in the form of illegality, “birthright citizenship” “tourism citizenship” and arranged, intra-ethnicity scammed “marriages . . .
Especially following the darkest days of the Nation’s history, a civil war fought in large part or your beloved “cheap labor”
ENOUGH. . . .
My friend, that is exactly the reason to pass it. You will not know how the courts will decide until it is a law. SCOTUS cannot make a ruling without such a legal challenge.
Result: 6-3 in favor of the illegals. A valiant but futile effort.
I don't agree with your assessment on how the courts will rule, but we will never know until it is tested. Futile, my a$$. Even if it were to fail, we would then know it will take a Constitutional amendment to change the law.
There are only two countries in the world that recognize birthright citizenship, us and Canada. Why should we continue with a policy that is costing us billions of dollars a year? One out of every 10 children born in this country are born to illegal aliens. They become entitled to food stamps, Medicaid, housing assistance etc. It must be changed and the first thing that needs to be done is to pass the bills in Congress to start the ball rolling.
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.