Posted on 01/21/2025 11:41:06 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
No standing.
L
Why would any state care?
The Supreme Court has ruled that constitutional Natural Born Citizens (NBC) must be born to parents who are legally in the U.S.
No per se constitutional “birthright citizenship”. Period.
Which 18 states, so we may know the enemy administrations?
A few states forcing all states to shoulder the burden of unconstitutional “birthright citizenship” is a deal breaker.
The era of the “Great Federal Sugar Daddy” are over. We don’t have the money, and neither do these states. They go back. Anchor baby and all. I don’t care what any court says, Americans cannot should the burden of other states irresponsibility any longer, nor should they be forced to do so.
Does the President and/or the Supreme Court have authorization to amend the Constitution?
The 18 states are no doubt blue states. More population means more congressmen. Stacking congress.
Original intent of the 14th Amendment
Senator Jacob Howard (served on the Senate Joint Committee on Reconstruction, which drafted the 14th) clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by stating:
"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."
Sen. Lyman Trumbull, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, author of the Thirteenth Amendment, and the one who inserted the phrase (All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the States wherein they reside):
[T]he provision is, that 'all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.' That means 'subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.' What do we mean by 'complete jurisdiction thereof?' Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.
Sen. W. Williams:
I understand the words here, 'subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,' to mean fully and completely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
Senator Jacob Howard states the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment published in the Congressional Record May 30, 1866.
https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=11
We have, at a minimum, 3 different Senators who were involved in drafting the 14th Amendment, stating on record in Congress that subject to the jurisdiction can not, does not, apply to foreigners or aliens (even if here legally).
The only thing missing for correcting the wrong introduced in the 1960's, is political will. We must do the right thing, and return to original intent of the 14th!.
Ignore. Carry on with removals.
Really? That certainly is not common knowledge on Free Republic, considering how many debates there have been on the subject of natural born citizenship over the years.
And many of those debates have discussed how the Supreme Court has never ruled on this.
Hopefully the fight is over while Trump is in office and his DOJ puts up a real fight for what’s right, with a hopefully sane SCOTUS to decide on it and be done with it.
The states that joined the suit are: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin.
Sue them back. And start issuing daily EOs, each with slightly different wording, faster than they can issue new lawsuits. This lawfare business must be ended once and for all.
**Which 18 states, so we may know the enemy administrations?**
6-3 SCOTUS. That’s us.
DC should have it’s “state” suing ability removed.
Where are the Red states countersuing these 16 states?
No.
The Constitution itself specifies the requirements to amend the Constitution.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the CongressU.S. Const., Art. V.
And many of those debates have discussed how the Supreme Court has never ruled on this.
Exactly! Wong Kim Ark was the harmed party in the 1898 case.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.