Are you claiming that a nation has a claim on children despite the loyalties of their parents? "Birthright citizenship" is functionally equivalent to a press gang in that it places obligations on people who might just be tourists having no intention of such.
Then I guess it would be unwise to strip them of their citizenship - which is based on the same exact thing as your own citizenship is based - being born in America.
That is false. She and I were born as children of American citizens. That's what makes us legitimate American citizens.
Or are we now making it a requirement that there are additional hoops that need to be jumped for some people and not others? That violates equal protection.
The Fourteenth Amendment instituted those "hoops" in the first place. Its current interpretation (your prefrence) is a legal fiction drawn by progressives with every intention of diluting the culture and serving the interests of the outrageously wealthy. Given that the children of aliens are not legally citizens (despite what the current administrative policy says), the equal protection clause very clearly does not apply to aliens, as it applies its privileges and immunities to the preceding citizenship clause.
In any case, I only hope you can see how your position serves Obama very well. If birth doesn’t make you a citizen - then the state can strip it from those it does not like, and award it to others who have no connection to America whatsoever.
This is a completely specious argument. Birth doesn't make one an American citizen, hell, there are people born all over the world that are not American citizens. There are also people born all over the world that are American citizens. The difference with the latter is the citizenship of their parents, just as it is within the borders of the United States.
“Are you claiming that a nation has a claim on children despite the loyalties of their parents? “Birthright citizenship” is functionally equivalent to a press gang in that it places obligations on people who might just be tourists having no intention of such.”
I would argue that it’s no such thing - but is a safeguard for the child and the rights of the child as opposed to their parents.
“That is false. She and I were born as children of American citizens. That’s what makes us legitimate American citizens.”
That’s not what the Fourteenth says. This opinion is explicitly rejected.
“The Fourteenth Amendment instituted those “hoops” in the first place.”
And it explicitly rejects this one. Hence my point. You are in violation of the equal protection clause already by trying to deprive some American citizens of their citizenship. We already have enough problems with Obama running roughshod over the constitution, let alone Conservatives.
“Birth doesn’t make one an American citizen”
Yes, it does. I know you have trouble following the plain and clear words of the constitution.
“There are also people born all over the world that are American citizens.”
So your argument is that because X is sometimes not Y, that proves that Y cannot be X?