Birthright Citizen: The Little Conjunction That Explains Everything

American Thinker ^ | 7 Aug, 2025 | Ted Noel

[aquila48]

Actually the important words are “under the jurisdiction” not “and”.

“Under the jurisdiction” means you are subject to the laws of that country.

So the question is, is someone, regardless of his status” who happens to be in the US, subject to our laws?

As far as I know, they are. If someone, regardless of his status, breaks a law they are subject to its enforcement.

So the problem is in the wording of the amendment.

A better wording would have been: “anyone born in the US of a LEGAL resident of the US, is a citizen of the US”. Then you don’t even need the “under the jurisdiction” clause.

[xzins]

I agree my expectation is not in the constitution. I don’t expect the constitution to constrain roberts at all, and this is a feelers issue for the girls, so amy will go with the girls club on this one.

[xzins]

Totally agree,but when has that ever been an issue?

[odawg]

He just pulled it out of his ass.

[P-Marlowe]

Interestingly, an illegal alien who has no contact with the US government and is working under the table would not be a subject, and is not under the jurisdiction of the United States. However, if that alien has been convicted of a crime and is in prison, then technically, until he is released and deported, he would be subject to the jurisdiction.

So in order for an illegal alien to give birth to a citizen, the illegal alien would have to be in prison when the child is born.

So technically, there is a loophole.

[brent13a]

I’m a scholar of the Constitution. “Subject to the jurisdiction” is simply meant to exclude a very narrow set of people, such as children of foreign diplomats. This argument put forth by the President is basically a non-starter.

Coolsies. I'm a scholar of the Constitution as well. Having read the writings of the guy who wrote that law, as well as the context of the law when it was written, there is no "narrow scope" to what it means. It means what it means, if you're a citizen of another country then the child does not become a citizen of the US.

That's it.

[delchiante]

It means what it means, if you’re a citizen of another country then the child does not become a citizen of the US.

That’s it.
....

And if the Swamp chooses to rule otherwise, adding to its long train of abuses and usurpations, the People always have 1776 as an option.

[ridesthemiles]

THAT IS A BULL CRAP SOLUTION

NOT ACCEPTABLE

THE PARENTS WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE EMPLOYED AT ALL>>>>>

[ridesthemiles]

IF THAT IS WHAT THEY MEANT—IT WOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED-—IN BLACK & WHITE

[xzins]

That’s hysterical in its own weird way.

[xzins]

It’s not a solution. It’s what i think scotus will do.

[ridesthemiles]

THANK YOU

THANK YOU

THANK YOU

[Kleon]

This is where scholars and jurists step in to interpret the meaning. Think of it this way: if someone is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, then that would also include the laws that state they can’t be here in the first place. QED.

[redinIllinois]

.

[itsahoot]

It’s amazing the number of times the fate of the nation depends on courts divining the meaning of one simple word.

This one will be much harder because it has three letters in it.

[itsahoot]

I’m a scholar of the Constitution.

More proof that Charlie Kirk is right, college is a scam.