Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Hojczyk

I wish he had said something along the lines of, “That’s not the right question, Megyn. Birthright citizenship to children of people here illegally was a mistake based on a misinterpretation of the 14th, written only in a footnote to another Supreme Court decision. I will ask Congress to clarify the 14th, as they have the power to do, and end birthright citizenship for children of people who are not in the U.S. legally. That will solve the problem.”


28 posted on 08/26/2015 11:00:01 AM PDT by Hetty_Fauxvert (Cruz. That's the answer. The question is obvious.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Hetty_Fauxvert
Bingo. The question as stated was full of assumptions and arguable points of law.
31 posted on 08/26/2015 11:01:27 AM PDT by gov_bean_ counter (Beware the Wisconsin Weasel - GOPe Plan B)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: Hetty_Fauxvert

People like to quote U.S. vs. Wong Kim Ark as precedent for birthright citizenship for illegals, but from what I’ve read, it simply doesn’t apply. The guy in question, Ark, a Chinese-American citizen (by our present standards) was born to Chinese people who were not U.S. citizens but who WERE here LEGALLY. And that is a huge difference. To my knowledge, the Supreme Court has never directly ruled that a child born to people who were here ILLEGALLY is a citizen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark


39 posted on 08/26/2015 11:08:07 AM PDT by Hetty_Fauxvert (Cruz. That's the answer. The question is obvious.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson