Posted on 10/30/2018 2:48:25 AM PDT by be-baw
That will be another issue for the Suprems, there being no law granting citizenship to those born here with no citizen parent.
As POTUS, Trump is the top law enforcement official who swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. Birthright Citizenship the way it is applied today was fabricated by the administrative bureaucratic deep state progressives and was never actually legislated. In other words, Trump is simply ignoring illegal imposed regulatory precedent and in essence just enforcing the actual rule of law. The original intent of U.S. Constitution as written including amendments trumps any other laws, regulations, or rulings. There is no compromise or middle ground in this regard.
That’s it in a nutshell. Well said. No other comments needed.
If you read his comments CAREFULLY,you will find that he NOT ONLY discusses natural born citizens, but ALSO:
“All from other lands, who by the terms of your laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; ...”
CLEARLY, his opinion is that aliens ONLY become citizens “by the terms of your laws and a compliance with their provisions ...”
Illegal aliens ARE NOT compliant, consequently, their children born in the United States ARE NOT EITHER.
FYI: Given his feelings on citizenship, do you think Representative Bingham would have voted FOR unlimited birthright citizenship?
OF COURSE NOT, but he VOTED FOR THE AMENDMENT. This lends credence to the notion that birthright WAS NOT UNLIMITED !!!
That is not the meaning of the phrase (subject to the jurisdiction...)
The following link goes to an article that contains quotes from the men who authored the phrase and the debates on the 14th Amendment.
http://www.cairco.org/issues/unconstitutionality-citizenship-birth-non-americans
Given the clear language used, by the men who wrote the 14th Amendment and the men who made it law, it seems (to me) that the Supreme Court would be very hard pressed to rule against ending the anchor baby fallacy.
Trump may be the best president we’ve had since Lincoln, perhaps Washington. As much as I loved the Gipper, I’ve never seen such courage or read about such courage in a President.
“Trump may be the best president we’ve had since Lincoln, perhaps Washington.”
I told my wife recently that Trump is the greatest president of my lifetime. Truman was president when I was born.
My grandparents were born in Rochester, NY (1), Meriden, CT (1), and Brooklyn, NY (2) in 1893, 1894, 1895, and 1896.
At the time of their birth, only one of my 8 great-grandparents was a US citizen, having been born in New York City in 1864. The other seven great-grandparents were subjects of the Emperor of Germany or of Her Britannic Majesty Victoria Alexandrina.
At no time during the lives of my grandparents was it ever suggested that they were not US citizens. My grandfathers served in the Army and the Navy during WW I. My mother’s mother was a NYC public school teacher for 55 years at a time when US citizenship was a requirement.
Both of my grandfathers’ WW I draft cards had boxes to check for citizenship status. There were two boxes: “Natural born” and “Naturalized” (there was also a box labelled “Alien”). Since my grandparents were never naturalized, both of my grandfathers checked “natural born”.
Do you assert that none of the millions and millions of white children born to immigrants who were not naturalized were actually citizens? No one at the time asserted that - no one.
I have citizenship papers from a great great grandfather...it specifically asks or says that the applicant Renounces any loyalty to the Emperor of Germany. That’s I think how they became American citizens.
So, in case you people missed it...under the 14th, children born here to foreign nationals, whether here legally or illegally, are not U.S. citizens.
_-—————————————————————————
Not according to USSC Wong Kim Ark ~1895.
According to this decision, children born to legally residing aliens in allegiance to the US ARE born US citizens.
This has been the practice for over 100 years.
Not 100 years only since ole Teddy Kennedy stuck his finger in the immigration issue in the 1960’s 1970’s. or about 40 years.
Self-taught genius...learned his trade at the school of hard knocks in NY real estate, wrestling promoter, gambling casino, golf as player and golf course owner, winery (largest East of the Mississippi) and tv show presenter.
In summary, 50 years experience in negotiating with corrupt officials, corrupt unions, and corrupt government.
Ping to POTUS Trump stating that he intends to “end birthright citizenship by executive order”
Will Barry be getting nervous, now? Barry has no BC that isn’t forged in the public record, if President Trump gets around to pushing the issue.
14th Amendment and subsequent Immigration and Nationality Acts.
Ping to POTUS Trump stating that he intends to “end birthright citizenship by executive order”
Will Barry be getting nervous, now? Barry has no BC that isn’t forged in the public record, if President Trump gets around to pushing the issue.
Thanks, Seizethecarp. Wait until after midterms, and we may see action our country has never witnessed prior to President Trump's election.
Thanks for the ping!
Will Barry be getting nervous, now? Barry has no BC that isn’t forged in the public record, if President Trump gets around to pushing the issue.
Heh heh, thanks Seizethecarp, interesting take.
Listened to Rush’s podcast yesterday. It seems that Teddy Kennedy enacted something in ‘65 that started this whole anchor baby thing. It’s doubtful, or indeed unlikely that an EO can reverse an act of Congress signed into, or that unless the GOP gets a huge majority next week, it can be repealed. So the only way to get rid of Teddy’s immigration act would be a constitutional amendment starting in the states. If the states ratify it and then send it on to Congress, if it’s an election year, they might just feel pressured to give it the necessary super majorities in both houses, especially if there’s a red tsunami next week, as hoped. An EO, however, would be promptly blocked by the courts, and thereby make the issue red hot. So it’s good politics right before the election.
up next plyler v doe? educating the offspring of illegals...
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/457/202
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
