[trumandogz]

I am VERY sure that the author of the Amendment, as well as those who voted for its adoption has NO idea that years later a political court would interpret its citizenship provisions in a perverted way that in effect gave the Amendment precisely the opposite effect from that intended, which was to PREVENT any merely jus solis citizenship for the children of foreigners.

Sure, but as Strict Constructionists, we cannot assume what the Framers meant and can only read the words that they wrote. If you are to begin to assume what the Framers intended, you open up the door to the Anti-Second Amendment folks who claim, "The Framers only intended for us to have muskets and never intended for the people to own the high powered weapons that are available today."

And that is not a road we need to travel.

[John Valentine]

I don’t have to “assume” what was meant by the 14th, as I feel quite confident that I can rely on the explanation provided by the chief drafter, and I also feel quite confident that I can apply the well known rules of construction to the language of the 14th itself. It’s just too bad that the Supreme Court did not feel any obligation to stick to what the authors meant, and waht they wrote, but instead made up their own preferred meaning and interpretation out of thin air.