[adam_az]

"You would have to make some contention base on the middle phrase, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". What exactly that phrase means may be subject to discussion."

The author of the amendment wrote about exactly what it means.

We're misinterpreting it NOW.

This will bring it back in line with the original intent.

[adamsjas]

The author of the amendment wrote about exactly what it means.

And this is written where?

The article simply states:

argues the words “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” suggests the 14th Amendment does not apply to children of undocumented immigrants because their parents are living in the United States illegally.

If the parents are not subject to the jusisdiction of the US, then by what means could they be arrested and deported?

[Procyon]

It will take a constitutional amendment to change the 14th Amendment. Unless it overrules itself, the Supreme Court is bound by its 1898 Wong Kim Ark case, holding that a child born in the United States of Chinese parents who were ineligible themselves to be naturalized is a citizen of the United States nevertheless and entitled to all the rights and privileges of citizenship. Congress' intent in including the qualifying phrase "and subject to the jurisdiciton thereof," was apparently to exclude from the reach of the language children born of diplomatic representatives of a foreign state and children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation.

Do you think there are the votes on the Supreme Court to reverse itself, or 2/3 of each house of congress and 3/4 the state legislatures to change this?