Trump to O'Reilly: The 14th Amendment is unconstitutional

Politico ^ | 8/19/15 | Nick Gass

[jimbo123]

Donald Trump clashed with Bill O’Reilly on Tuesday night over the part of his immigration plan that would take away citizenship from the children who were born in the United States but whose parents came to the country illegally.

Under the 14th Amendment, O’Reilly told Trump on “The O’Reilly Factor,” mass deportations of so-called birthright citizens cannot happen.

Trump disagreed, and said that “many lawyers are saying that’s not the way it is in terms of this.”

“What happens is, they’re in Mexico, they’re going to have a baby, they move over here for a couple of days, they have the baby,” Trump said, telling O’Reilly that the lawyers said, “It’s not going to hold up in court, it’s going to have to be tested.

[sevlex]

’ “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.”
I would argue that since they are here in violation to our laws they are not subject to the jurisdiction thereof. If they were subject to the jurisdiction they would not be here. ‘

Exactly. Open-borders advocates conveniently ignore the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” part. Kind of like how they conveniently drop the “illegal” from immigrants when describing border jumpers. If we are to accept the progressive definition, then children of diplomats born here would be birthright citizens. But...they are not. Why? Because: “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”.

[gdani]

Yes it is. But you see, he didn’t say what the headline claims.

This is Politico and you got punked.

Indeed. I went back & watched the interview.

With Trump making so many asinine statements day after day just about anything said about him sounds true.

In any event, at the end of the interview, Trump told O'Reilly he will challenge it in court. Will anyone remember when he does not? Will anyone care?

[FlingWingFlyer]

If Trump is elected, all he has to do is Obama the 14th Amendment. “Executive Action” baby! That’s how to rule over the unwashed masses. Just ask Obama or Chillary Clinton.

[patriotspride]

If the parents are illegal...the kids are illegal. You can’t skip the legal step.

---

Watching Fox news I kept asking the same question to myself.... I’d like to see one of the analysts just ask it that simply....

[patriotspride]

If Trump said this, I don’t think he meant the Amendment was at fault..

the way the illegal aliens are using it is at fault..

---

Agree. But politicians who should now this, and aren’t enforcing it that way want air cover for their current/past doings

[Genoa]

For reference, here is Section 1 of Amendment 14, in full:

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. 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.

[Fhios]

Shamelessly made up.

Trump said they have a different interpretation and are going to test it in the courts.

[GBA]

Trump called it: "Our country is going to hell."

After legalized infanticide and now overturning God's verdict regarding marriage, Mr. Trump, I'd say we are arriving at the gate.

Flight attendants ValJar, Hilly and Moo request that you "Please remain seated and keep your seat belt fastened while the captain taxis what's left of the aircraft to the gate."

[KC Burke]

The wording in the headline is idiotic. After reading the article it is clear that the words in the headline are said by no one. Nick Gass looks like an idiot. He should blow up at politico.

[Lib-Lickers 2]

if the 14th ammendment had wanted every person born inside of the United States to automatically be citizens it would have said so simply..

it would have said “any person born within the borders of the United States is a citizen”.. PERIOD.

but it did not say such a stupid thing..

it was any citizen born within the United States under it’s jurisdiction is a citizen.. (jurisdiction being their alliance) an illegal’s alliance is from the country or government they came from(ie.from where the illegal parent came from before they dropped the kid over the border)..

the way the 14th ammendment now is wrongly interpreted:

let’s say if a billion Chinese pregnant women could sneak in and give birth on an island in the Aleutians tomorrow the Unitied States could legally be taken over by the Chinese in a generation without a shot being fired...

btw most Indians at that point were not and did want to be considered citizens because even though they were born inside the border of the United States they were NOT under the jurisdiction of the states or of the Federal government BIG BIG difference between “under the jurisdiction of” and just being over the border

[FirstFlaBn]

How about we apply Obama’s “principle” as used in claiming the Iran agreement isn’t really a treaty and thus doesn’t have to comply with the Constitution’s treaty ratification requirements.

Here’s how it would work: insert language in a trade agreement with Mexico to clarify the meaning of the 14th Amendment. That is: only babies born of LEGAL immigrants get citizenship. Tell Mexico the provision is non-negotiable.

Under the Obama rule, President Trump would then grant himself the power to prohibit federal agencies from processing any paperwork related to citizenship for anchor babies. He would issue the same order as it related to actions for U.S. states.

When the sky failed to fall and American voters saw the improvement in problems related to illegals, Trump could then begin to build support for an amendment to clarify the 14th.

All that’s needed is for Obama’s “it’s not a treaty” BS to stand. Now what do you think the chances are the Pubbies will stop it? If he gets by with it, he has set a legal precedent for my solution described above (a political/administrative solution in the short run to save the country while manuevering through the amendment process).

[mlo]

"The 14th Amendment has been used by Liberals for decades as a grab bag to justify everything under the sun including same sex marriage and anchor babies."

It is also the device that applies the 1st and 2nd amendments to the states.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Thanks for the info, and

B T T T

[stephenjohnbanker]

Great post.

[moehoward]

Nick Glass, Supreme F-Tard.

[gdani]

it was any citizen born within the United States under it’s jurisdiction is a citizen.. (jurisdiction being their alliance) an illegal’s alliance is from the country or government they came from(ie.from where the illegal parent came from before they dropped the kid over the border)..

Or jurisdiction could mean subject to the laws of the United States. Especially given that is the standard meaning of jurisdiction, not "alliance".

[Dick Bachert]

Thanks for the bump! Be safe. Like a cornered animal, the cretin in the Spite House will become increasingly dangerous in these next months.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Agreed. I expect no less than a “scorched earth” program.

[Lib-Lickers 2]

if they wanted to say the laws of the United States they would have said so but because they had no idea where one might be from they put the word jurisdiction.. if Prince William’s next child happens to be born here that doesn’t make him a citizen of this country,,,, the 14th ammendment was for the freed blacks who had no other jurisdiction than this country otherwise it would have just said EVERYBODY born here is a citizen but it didn’t for a reason... it’s really not a complicated issue if it were dealt with logically

[Lib-Lickers 2]

this will explain it for the slower learners out there.. this from the very people who ratified the amendment.. read it and learn

http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship/original_intent.html