Posted on 10/31/2018 3:22:57 PM PDT by TBP
Precisely!
The author is caught up in the liberal's panic.
Trump is not trying to curb "legal citizens". There is nothing "legal" about a baby dropped by two illegal entrants.
That's a globalist's dream about making the U.S. disappear over time.
It appears some misunderstand the term "birthright citizenship".
Yeah, Obama really suffered greatly when he got in that trouble. You're an idiot sir.
Say what..???
Another East Coast Fake American telling Americans how to run their country.
Hasn’t there been enough damage done by the Immigration Act of 1965?
Does Mr Lipsky tell Israel to open its borders to allcomers, or does he view the rights of American citizens somehow fundamentally different from Israeli citizens?
This is worth your time to read.
He is also establishing a strong initial negotiating position relative to getting Congress to act with legislation.
Wow. Think I lost about 20 IQ points just by reading this stupidity.
Another person who believes our sovereignty should be for sale. - Tom
A couple of simple points.
1) Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution makes citizenship/naturalization the responsibility of Congress. Period.
2) The 14th Amendment in no way changes Article 1 Section 8, rather it deals with former slaves and their citizenship.
3) After the passage of the Constitution and the 14th Amendment it took an act of Congress in 1924 to give Native Americans birthright American citizenship.
4) So who in their right mind thinks aliens who break our laws in being here get the benefit of American citizenship for their children, when they owe the USA no allegiance for starters, and are in fact citizens of another country?
This is just not that hard.
So, Seth, my daughter was born at Landstuhl US Army Region Medical Center in Germany. Does that make her a German?
Can we get on that sweet, all butter, no guns, European welfare train?
No. Do you know why?
BECAUSE NO COUNTRY OTHER THAN THE USA HAS BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP FOR FOREIGNERS/NON-CITIZENS. NONE!
There is surprisingly little germane to the "subject to the jurisdiction" phrase. Like the 2A militia reference, it was apparently so commonly understood at the time that it needed no debate. Such as there was revolved mostly on whether or not Indians on reservations subject to tribal law were covered.
Relevant discussion begins on p.44 of the linked document. Some excerpts:
Sen Howard, who introduced the amendment to the floor understood it not to include children of foreigners. In fact, he understood it not to include Indians on reservations as the reservations were quasi-foreign states.
Sen. Trumbull asserts: "What do we mean by "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States?" Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means."
Sen. Johnson observes: "Now, all that this amendment provides is, that all persons born in the United States and not subject to some foreign Power — for that, no doubt, is the meaning of the committee who have brought the matter before us — shall be considered as citizens of the United States. That would seem to be not only a wise but a necessary provision. If there are to be citizens of the United States entitled everywhere to the character of citizens of theUnited States there should be some certain definition of what citizenship is, what has created the character of citizen as between himself and the United States, and the amendment says that citizenship may depend upon birth, and I know of no better way to give rise to citizenship than the fact of birth within the territory of the United States, born of parents who at the time were subject to the authority of the United States."
I suggest these senators - who originally debated passage of the amendment - wouyld say Lipsky's full of it.
The part of the 14th Amendment that is debated is the statement in section 1 shown below.
Amendment XIV
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.
Those who favor citizenship for children born on U.S. soil to an illegal immigrant mother will say that the baby is a subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S., meaning they are subjected to the laws of the U.S.. And therefore they are U.S. citizens in accordance with the Constitution as written.
However, when you look at original intent at the time the amendment was written and ratified (1868), no one could have expected mass illegal immigration into the U.S. for the sole purpose of having a child on U.S. soil so the child would become a U.S. citizen.
There were no social welfare programs and no education and healthcare systems in place so the authors of the amendment could not foresee the possible anchor baby issue.
If the originators of the 14th Amendment could have foreseen the anchor baby issue I am certain they would have added clarification to the amendment in order to protect U.S. taxpayers from having to pay for the children of illegal immigrants, people who violate U.S. immigration laws to enter the U.S..
“Trump is dead wrong about birthright citizenship”
Too bad, ball-gargler. He’s the chief executive. The reason why we have elections. It doesn’t matter what you think...
Fixed that for you.
Either we have laws which we follow or we become lawless ....ruled by people instead.
Paul Ryan is wrong. The Constitution, specifically the 14th Amendment, does not mandate that these people are citizens, because they are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States government. There are no laws or even court decisions saying that we have to grant them citizenship. So yes, Trump has the right to refuse them citizenship.
I agree with Trump that these 370,000/year children of illegal aliens have no right or privilege to citizenship. They and their parents should have to go through the application process provided by law.
“If you are a LEGAL immigrant and you have a child yes it is an American”
Foreigners or aliens are excluded under the 14th amendment. It was solely for STATELESS newly freed ‘slaves’.
There is no law giving citizenship to children born to foreign nationals as far as I know. And congress is the only branch with the plenary authority of naturalization.
Btw this is what is in NC. Probably is nearly or basically the same situation nationwide. I do not trust voting places. I have learned their system and watched polling offices method for several decades
30
Bump
Seth Lipsky SUCKS! Sorry just had to post that!!
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.