The Fourteenth Amendment was puprosely badly written so these kinds of trevsties could be undertaken.
What matters is what the RATIFIERS thought it meant and the ratifiers thought it meant that is was a Civil War Reconstruction amendment that reinstated former slaves to citizenship. That is all it was ratified to do.
Why do I say that? Because there is not a scintilla of a record of any debate about giving the federal gov’t sweeping powers to enforce the first ten amendments and things like what is natural born citizen.
This is a bogus Supreme Court decision. It is not supported by the Constitution or case precedent and needs to be ignored and nullified.
They wrote it just fine. They just didn’t think 160 years later people would be so stupid.
https://www.cetient.com/case/lynch-v-clarke-5701063
Clark v Lynch. (1844)
Lynch v. Clarke established that children born in the United States to temporary foreign visitors are natural-born U.S. citizens.
Case Background
The case involved Julia Lynch, born in New York City in 1819 to Irish parents who were temporarily visiting the United States. Her uncle, Thomas Lynch, died in 1833, leaving property that became the subject of a dispute. John Clarke claimed the property, arguing that Julia, as the child of foreign parents, was an alien and therefore ineligible to inherit under New York law, which barred aliens from inheriting land
Legal Issue
The central question was whether Julia Lynch was a U.S. citizen at birth, despite her parents being aliens temporarily residing in the country. This determination was crucial because only citizens could inherit property under New York law
Court’s Reasoning
The court examined the common law principle of jus soli, which grants citizenship to anyone born within the territory of a sovereign, regardless of parental nationality, except for children of foreign diplomats. The court concluded that Julia Lynch was a natural-born citizen because her parents’ stay in the U.S. was temporary and they had no intention of abandoning their native country permanently
The court emphasized that birth within the dominions and allegiance of the United States conferred citizenship, aligning with longstanding English common law
Significance
Lynch v. Clarke is historically significant as one of the earliest U.S. cases affirming birthright citizenship for children of temporary foreign visitors. It influenced the understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment’s citizenship clause, which later codified that all persons born in the U.S. and subject to its jurisdiction are citizens, with exceptions only for children of diplomats or hostile occupying forces
The case reinforced the principle that citizenship is determined by place of birth rather than parental nationality in most circumstances.
Key Takeaway
The ruling in Lynch v. Clarke established that jus soli applies in the United States, ensuring that children born on U.S. soil, even to non-citizen parents temporarily present, are natural-born citizens. This case remains a foundational precedent in U.S. citizenship law and the interpretation of birthright citizenship.