Krauthammer: Dead Wrong on the 14th

Special to FreeRepublic ^ | 5 August 2010 | John Armor (Congressman Billybob)

[Doe Eyes]

No, foreign citizens in our country are subject to US jurisdicition, just like any citizen. They are required to obey our laws and can be punished for any violatoins just like us. Even if they are here illegally.

Correct. The only foreign citizens not subject to US jurisdiction are diplomats, for whom this distinction is intended.

[Syncro]

Well, it looks like the 14th doesn't give the congress the power to define, but to enforce.

The Supreme Court apparently has the power to interpret the U.S. Constitution and to determine the constitutionality of laws passed by congress and the state legislatures. (ruled so in 1803)

[TigersEye]

So you think a citizen of France, while in the U.S., is no longer under the authority of France? Wrong. We’re not talking about criminal codes here. We’re talking about sovereignty issues.

[TigersEye]

Thank you. You put that much better than I did.

[brytlea]

Thank you. Mr. Krauthammer is usually right, but not always. I was quite alarmed when no one on that panel appeared to understand why this is important.

[Stentor]

Krauthammer: Dead Wrong on the 14th

He's also dead wrong on the 2nd. What's he right about.

[MHGinTN]

Bingo! It does appear that the ‘and subject to the jurisdiction thereof’ was meant to distinguish the diplomatic corps case as the exception thus defining the general rule of thumb for all others.

[Congressman Billybob]

No, the specific statute to allow Japanese dependents born in the US to be considered Japanese citizens, was passed long after the 14th Amendment was adopted.

John / Billybob

[mlo]

"We’re not talking about criminal codes here. We’re talking about sovereignty issues."

No we aren't. We're talking about "jurisdiction". Not sure what you even mean about "sovereignty" because France has none of that either within our borders.

jurisdiction: "the limits or territory within which authority may be exercised"

A citizen of France visiting this country is subject to our laws and is within our jurisdiction. A diplomat from France is not.

[TigersEye]

I’m sorry you don’t get it. It isn’t about the jurisdiction of criminal law it’s about the jurisdiction of citizenship.

[Publius6961]

I have not read the cases such as Wong Kim Ark, etc., so I don't know the answer.

Wouldn't do any good.

Over time, different Supreme Courts have reached (and justified) opposite decisions for identical cases brought before it. This has happened enough times that it is puzzling why it has not been more thoroughly debated and clarified.

These are huge flaws in our system, akin to the maddening reality that the only way to impeach ( and remove) a corrupt congressperson is by having other congresspersons do it.

What if the "unthinkable" happened and the majority of congresspersons are corrupt and compromised?

Welcome to our current "State of the Union."

[onyx]

BTTT!