Posted on 04/20/2025 6:38:54 PM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
During this week’s broadcast of FNC’s “Sunday Morrning Futures,” Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) offered an optimistic take on the Trump administration’s challenge to the country’s existing birthright citizenship policy currently being considered by the Supreme Court.
“Look, Jason, this is a fascinating case,” he said. “It’s a close case. It can be won. No one knows the outcome for sure. But one thing that’s important for everyone to keep in mind, this case is not about whether birthright citizenship exists, nor does it undermine the 14th Amendment’s birthright citizenship promise. This is, rather, about what the contours of birthright citizenship look like, whether or not you can be someone who’s born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
Lee continued, “It’s that second phrase in the 14th Amendment, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, that we’re looking at here. What President Trump has done is issued an executive order directing agencies prospectively not to recognize the birthright citizenship of people born after the moment of this order’s issuance, saying that they won’t be recognized as birthright citizens unless, at the time of their birth, they have at least one parent who was either a citizen or a lawful permanent resident. And so this is a closed question.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Not with this treasonous Supremacist Court. Two many dizzy broads.
It’s not close. It’s utter retardation to twist the law into allowing anchor babies. And the “elite” are quite retarded.
Not with this avoid everything Court
This is a hostile Supreme Court.
Six of the nine justices were appointed by Republicans. Three of those six were appointed by Trump.
Some people blame the Federalist Society. Others blame Mitch McConnell and the senate RINOs. Some blame Trump.
Republicans are notorious for appointing more squishes than conservatives. It’s been going on for a long time.
The left doesn’t make mistakes when it comes to appointments.
Republicans need to do better.
It must be won or the muslims will control this Country in a few years. They are getting footholds in Texas and Minn.
The lawless supreme court will never do it. After what they just did then there is no question that they have no regard for the law or the constitution. Let alone do they have any desire to protect this country.
Austin is a Muslim colony.
close? are you kidding?
if any country allowed birthright citizenship for those who entered the country illegally, that country would be 20 years from being taken over by any country willing to send enough people to change the vote... 20 years in the future.
it cannot be allowed.
those who wrote the 14th NEVER intended it to apply to ambassadors or tourists... illegals are just uninvited tourists that never left.
I have little faith in the SC in making the correct finding.
"It’s not close. It’s utter retardation to twist the law into allowing anchor babies. And the “elite” are quite retarded."
I fully agree. In fact, we're being played by RINOs imo.
Patriots not familiar with the history of the 14th Amendment's (14A) "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" phrase may find the following material interesting. It is arguably one of the briefer ways to show how Congress interpreted the jurisdiction phrase of Section 1 of 14A, that phrase not intended to automatically give citizenship to people born to foreigners in the US imo.
"14th Amendment, Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside [emphasis added]. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
First, while 14A was being drafted, the post-Civil War 39th Congress had made a bill defining citizenship based on people born in US, the Civil Rights Act of 1866 (CRA1866), the Republican majority Congress dubiously basing this bill on the 13th Amendment (13A) imo.
Excerpted from 13A:
"Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
"CRA1866 [, Sec. 1:] Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same right, in every State and Territory in the United States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none other, any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, to the contrary notwithstanding." --From Civil Rights Act of 1866." —THIRTY-NINTH CONGRESS. Sass. I. CH. 31. 1866. 27 CHAP. X (CRA1866)
Next, Democratic President Andrew Johnson, a former slave owner, vetoed the bill based on his allegedly strong opposition to federally guaranteed rights for black Americans.
Republican majority lawmakers then overrode Johnson veto.
However, Rep. John Bingham and other lawmakers cautioned Republicans that 13A did not give Congress sufficient power to justify CRA1866. (I agree with Bingham.)
After 14A was ratified in 1868, Congress recycled CRA1866 by referencing it in Section 18 of the Civil Rights Act of 1870 making Congress's original definition of born citizens, which excluded people born to non-citizens from automatic citizenship, the official law of the land.
Also, note that Senator Jacob Howard, the author of 14A's "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" phrase, had attempted to clarify that children born to foreigners and foreign dignitaries while in US are excluded from birth citizenship.
"...[E]very person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law [all emphases added] 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 person." —Speech on the proposed 14th Amendment
Howard's statement could have been better written imo.
Given CRA1866 with its exclusion of children born to foreigners in US being preserved by CR1870, my conclusion is that elite Desperate Democrats and RINOs who are arguing that Sen. Jacob Howard's statement was intended to exclude only children born to foreign dignitaries in US are in error.
We need this
That’s all it is.
A recipe for invasion and takeover.
It’s already happened in the Southwest and the Pacific Coast.
Senator Padilla and Gallego? Which country are they loyal to?
No one has to guess.
If SCOTUS rules for Trump on the 15th of May limiting judicial overreach, it will suggest they will also let stand Trump’s Birthright Citizen EO.
For the record, 75% of the illegal aliens Obama removed were nonjudicial removals, meaning they bypassed immigration court hearings and judicial oversight without any judicial overreach from Republican federal judges at the time.
9-0 Constitutional Amendment required.
I will be very surprised if there is one dissent.
Why do you say that? The GOP is a pro-open borders party. Have been for years.
Exactly. Only if possible close because our USSC is as corrupt as the rest of our government and other institutions.
And so, apparently too, is “MAGA” now.
Fool us three times, shame on us, no?
Which it may be.
I don’t trust this court at all. Roberts will never go for it and Amy Coney Barrett is anybody’s guess.
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.