Tribal American Indians had treaty and sovereignty rights that were determined to preclude jurisdiction until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. Many non-reservation Indians had already been granted citizenship.
“The Act granted citizenship to about 125,000 of 300,000 indigenous people in the United States. To put these numbers in perspective, the U.S. population at that time was less than 125 million. The indigenous people who were not included in citizenship numbers had already become citizens by other means; entering the armed forces, giving up tribal affiliations, and assimilating into mainstream American life were the ways this was done. Citizenship had been granted in a piecemeal fashion before the Act, which was the first more inclusive method of granting Native American citizenship. The Act did not include citizens born before the effective date of the 1924 act, or outside of the United States as an indigenous person, however, and it was not until the Nationality Act of 1940 that all persons born on U.S. soil were citizens.”— Wikipedia
Ending birthright citizenship is probably going to take overturning the Supreme Court’s ruling in U.S. v Wong Kim Ark (1898) which established the precedent of non-citizen offspring being citizens if born here. Of course Wong Kim Ark’s parents were here legally when he was born.
The second sentence of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment has been interpreted to be definitive: “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.
The wording switches from “citizen” to “person.”
RE: Tribal American Indians had treaty and sovereignty rights that were determined to preclude jurisdiction until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.
PRECISELY. So my point is this — the 14th Amendment was NOT MEANT for everyone born in American soil. The intent was narrowly tailored for SLAVES and their CHILDREN born in the United States.
Illegals and American Indians were not in the drafters’ mind otherwise, why the NEED for the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924?
So Congress can pass laws deciding under what circumstances a person can or cannot be a citizen. They can do it today.
RE: Ending birthright citizenship is probably going to take overturning the Supreme Court’s ruling in U.S. v Wong Kim Ark (1898) which established the precedent of non-citizen offspring being citizens if born here. Of course Wong Kim Ark’s parents were here legally when he was born.
I don’t have a problem giving birthright citizenship with children of those who are here LEGALLY ( e.g. Wong Kim Ark, Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio ).
So, the above case is an ENTIRELY SEPARATE ISSUE. Let’s stick to the issue of ILLEGALs.
RE: “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.
The wording switches from “citizen” to “person.”
OK, so Congress passes a law withholding birthright citizenship from ILLEGALS. I don’t think that deprives them of life, liberty or property.
The law they pass IS DUE PROCESS.
I don’t even have a problem making the law APPLY ONLY AFTER IT HAS BEEN PASSED ( not retroactively ).