From Congressional debate for adopting the 14th Amendment.
From Congressional debate for adopting the 14th Amendment.
There IS no “guarantee of birthright citizenship” in our US Constitution, US Code, Statutory or Case law. There is only bureaucratic history, administrative compliance to issue birth certificates to everyone to rely on for this error in judgment.
The 14th Amendment makes it CLEAR that, ONLY children of US Citizens, or those otherwise under the jurisdiction of our Constitution (those living in territories, on reservations, etc) NOT of a foreign country are born as US citizens.
This is SO simple it’s why the founders and congress left it alone; it wasn’t codified until the 1860’s AFTER the war between the states was settled.
“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.” - 14th Amendment
Children born of parents who are NOT “subjects” (as in “subjects of the crown” - CITIZENS) can NOT BE citizens themselves by “birthright.”.
That pesky little coordinating conjunction “and” certainly does confuse people, especially the semiliterate and agenda-driven lawyers and jurists today and for several decades past who haven’t understood a WORD of our US Constitution much less really read it in the context of its writing.
For reference: Coordinating Conjunctions
“And” is a coordinating conjunction used to join words, phrases, or clauses that are of equal importance and grammatical structure. It is one of the seven coordinating conjunctions in English, which can be remembered using the acronym FANBOYS (For, And, Nor, But, Or, Yet, So).
In the words of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (RIP) “The constitution says what it says and doesn’t say what it doesn’t say.”
This is going to be interesting, see how they define “subject to jurisdiction “…
A person who is not a citizen but commits a crime in this country is still subject to our laws, like in any country, save diplomats with immunity.
You don’t have to be a citizen to be under the jurisdiction of the law of the land.
Likewise I doubt the writers of the amendment meant for visa babies, illegals having children, and foreigners paying for children to be born with American citizenship mothers to get automatic citizenship
Will see if the SC can grow a spine and do the right thing, not holding my breath
Exactly! No ‘interpretation’ needed.
Birthright Citizenship: Interpreting The Phrase "Subject To The Jurisdiction Thereof"
The problem with the birthright-related excerpt by Sen. Jacob M. Howard from the Congressional Globe is this imo. It is written in spoken English instead of cleaned up written English. Consequently, activist judges for example, can get away with arguing that the phrase "who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited..." applies to foreigners, two commas back, limiting the scope of foreigners to families of ambassadors or foreign ministers, meaning not foreigners in general.
Better evidence (imo) of what Sen. Howard meant when he mentioned foreigners is actually found in Congress's first birthright citizenship-related law shown below.
"CRA1866 [, Sec. 1:] Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same right, in every State and Territory in the United States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none other, any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, to the contrary notwithstanding." --From Civil Rights Act of 1866." —THIRTY-NINTH CONGRESS. Sass. I. CH. 31. 1866. 27 CHAP. X (CRA1866)
Regarding "foreign power" in CRA1866 above, note that Law of Nations, international law at the time the Constitution was drafted, clearly states that the newborn child inherits the citizenship of the father, no matter where the child is born.
"[Law of Nations,] Book I, Chapter 19, section 212:The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children [all emphases added]; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country."
And while the corrupt media continually tries to water down the significance of the Law of Nations with respect to the Constitution, particularly where POTUS natural born citizenship requirement is concerned, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice John Jay, had officially clarified that the Law of Nations is the law of the United States as much as the Constitution is.
Excerpted from the writings of Chief Justice John Jay:
"That you may percieve more clearly the Extent and objects of your Inquiries, it may be proper to observe that the Laws of the united States admit of being classed under three Heads or3 Descriptions—1st. all Treaties made under the authority of the united States.—John Jay’s Charge to the Grand Jury, the Circuit Court for the District of Virginia, 22 May 17932dly. The Laws of nations [emphasis added]—
3dly. The Constitution, and Statutes of the united States—"
The bottom line regarding the politically correct push for birthright citizenship is this imo. Desperate elite Democrats and RINOs are allegedly rigging elections to try stay in power so that they can continue their ongoing abuse of their repealable (hint) 16th Amendment powers (direct taxes), the compromised, deep state Congress not able to justify most taxes under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers.