Replies

If you're on American soil, you're under American jurisdiction unless specifically granted other status.

Were this not the case, we would have no legal basis to bring foreigners who commit crimes on our soil into our courts.

If you're on American soil, you're under American jurisdiction unless specifically granted other status.

Were this not the case, we would have no legal basis to bring foreigners who commit crimes on our soil into our courts.

Are you implying that illegals have the same Constitutional rights as U.S. citizens?

It seems to me that the Mexicain government is and has been demanding a say in any capitol case that involve one of their citizens in our courts. Is not that a claim of a jusidiction outside of our own? That claim has also been approved by The world Court in the Hague.

If you're on American soil, you're under American jurisdiction unless specifically granted other status.

Explain, then, how a participant in the original legislation clearly thought otherwise:

Rep. John Bingham of Ohio, considered the father of the Fourteenth Amendment, confirms the understanding and construction the framers used in regards to birthright and jurisdiction while speaking on civil rights of citizens in the House on March 9, 1866:

[I] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen...[6]

Further, are you then arguing that British soldiers and mercenaries during the War of 1812 were under the "jurisdiction" of the United States and thereby any children born here to them were also citizens?
How about any children that might have been fathered by the mass murderers of 911 ?