Replies

I’ll be back to this, because it looks pretty good on first blush.

Some folks just can’t fathom that it was never intended to grant birthright citizenship to every child born on U. S. soil.

This interpretation needs to be smashed, crushed, and destroyed, because it is a false premise that has cost us dearly.

It is continuing to do so also.

right now we have chinese tourists entering to establish anchor baby status. They aren’t claiming refugee clearance. Such pregnant women should be denied travel visas to the US until their pregnancy is over.

And we have illegal immigrants breaking into the country and dropping a kid and also claiming ties to this land.

Not much different than breaking into your home and demanding a room as a squatter.

Unfortunately, progressives have been full on brainwashing on this issue since the supremes ‘said’ otherwise wrongly in 1888. It’s been pushed as the kind, American norm on every public school kid since. I should know, but am forgetting, whether the decision was wrongly decided or has since been over broadly interpreted. It may be the latter, but it certainly is not supported by either an originalist or a texualist reading of the 14th.

Some progressive propoganda is so insidious even alert Freepers nearly don’t realize it’s there. I rewatched Crosby and Astaire in 1941’s Holiday Inn, the film that brought us White Christmas. They snuck in FDR’s mug amidst an ode to his, anti-founding fathers, proposal for a 2nd, gimme ‘dat, ‘Bill of Rights’. I don’t recall noticing it before. I’m failing to imagine a Trump Tweet positively presented within current entertainment. I’m certain all today’s crowd would notice odd about the film was the one number done in blackface. They’d move to ban ‘White’ Christmas for ‘racist’ association.

There are only about 30 countries in the world that have birthright citizenship, most of them in the Western Hemisphere. No country in Europe has birthright citizenship. The only developed countries that have it are the US and Canada.

Not that long ago (and possibly even now), someone from a first world country who arrived here LEGALLY and gave birth was expected to report the birth to their nearest consul or embassy so the child would get the citizenship of their parents.

When my daughter was born in a civilian hospital in Japan, we were warned we had a time limit to do the paperwork necessary to get her a passport to ensure U.S. Citizenship.

The Japanese hospital would provide us with a birth certificate but no automatic citizenship. Their law, like virtually every other country on earth, considered the child to be the nationality of her parents and deferred to the parents country of origin as to exactly how the citizenship would be transferred.

The repetition of statements made in the debate over XIV is basically irrelevant to what has to happen now.

There is no Article III court that will rule that what the writers of XIV MEANT to say should govern over what they DID say.

If you can be detained by the executive and brought before the judiciary to enforce laws made by the legislature, and subsequently can lose your property and be involuntarily removed to another country, then in the ordinary English meaning of “jurisdiction of the United States”, you are certainly subject to it.

So (and I have the greatest respect for Michael Anton), this is all mental masturbation.

If the GOAL is to end the foolish practice of birthright citizenship, the Constitution is going to have to be amended. I don’t see how else to get there from here.