[EternalVigilance]

Whoops. Forgot the link to the American Thinker article he references:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/07/the_question_of_birthright_cit.html

[Marty62]

Anyone with a working knowledge of this section of the Constitution.

Wasn’t this put in the Constitution to protect children born to SLAVES-Period?

[Cacique]

btt

[stephenjohnbanker]

Take it to SCOTUS.

[OldDeckHand]

"The problem is not “birthright citizenship.” Most American citizens are birthright citizens, meaning simply that at birth, and without need of any process of naturalization , they are natural born citizens of the United States."

Absolutely right. And, people always get this wrong. It bugs me.

The US should do what many (maybe even most) of the European countries have done, and adopt a lux soli requirement, rather than a plain jus soli requirement. That is to say that not only do your parents have to be in this country legally, at least one of your parents has to be a US citizen. Yep, I know that's not exactly what the Founders had in mind, but things change depending on circumstances, and our circumstance is now dire. Until we do that, our problems will continue, IMHO.

[umgud]

[patlin]

A simple look at the Expatriation Act the was a follow-up to the 14th makes it very clear:

or how about going back to the original language of the 1866 Act:

The 1866 Act provides: "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." As this formulation makes clear, any child born on U.S. soil to parents who were temporary visitors to this country and who, as a result of the foreign citizenship of the child's par­ents, remained a citizen or subject of the parents' home country was not entitled to claim the birth­right citizenship provided by the 1866 Act.

[HiJinx]

Ping!

[tutstar]

ping