There sure is a lot of unnecessary hoopla going around about those “anchor babies” if that statement is true.
Glad you brought that up. As another example of Jeff's irrationality, He doesn't believe "Anchor Babies" are valid, but he completely supports the interpretation of law that creates them.
Jeff's position is that birth on our soil is the ONLY criteria necessary to be an American Citizen. He has repeatedly said that children of aliens, born on our soil are "natural born citizens."
He has said this over and over and over and there is no mistaking that his position is firmly supportive of citizenship by birth on our soil regardless of parental allegiance.
His position absolutely creates Anchor Babies, but he also opposes "anchor babies." Talk about schizoid. It makes your head hurt trying to think in this circle.
Now I will note. After MamaTexan boxed his ears with that quote from Bayard's son, for the first time I can recall, Jeff started arguing that legal DOMICILE is relevant to the point. Sure. Under the 14th amendment as interpreted by Wong Kim Ark, the court held that a permanent Domicile meets the necessary criteria to be regarded as a citizen under the 14th amendment.
This is not an unreasonable position, but it's the FIRST time i've ever seen Jeff express such a qualifier. Prior to that, Jeff has been insistent that ANYONE born on American soil is Automatically a NATURAL BORN citizen. That the ONLY REQUIREMENT was birth on the soil.
Maybe Jeff is learning or something, but I doubt it.