AND subject to the jurisdiction thereof?

[Zincwarrior]

laws apply to everyone,, their first act was to break our laws,,

Exactly, unless its by treaty (ex. diplomatic immunity). So because they have jurisdiction, the 14th Amendment applies to them.

 

[Zincwarrior]

youre the one in error not me,,

The SCOTUS ruling is going to disappoint you.

 

[Stryder50]

they are arguing that children born to illegal aliens and those that intend to fraud the USA are not US citizens,,
their first act was to break our laws,,
your ignorance is showing again,,

Like most LWNJ (Left Wing Nut Job) he's willing to give away to any and all what he hasn't earned or owns.

 

[progressive hunter]

Exactly, unless its by treaty (ex. diplomatic immunity). So because they have jurisdiction, the 14th Amendment applies to them.

incorrect,,

"subject to our laws" is not "under our jurisdiction",, especially when their first act is to break our laws,,

why do foreign countrys have embassys and consulates in the USA??

 

[progressive hunter]

The SCOTUS ruling is going to disappoint you.

most likely,,

if it does go your anti american way it will open the door to ban all abortions though since it says "persons" born, which means they are a person before birth not after,,

 

[Cassandro]

A Chinese citizen is not subject to Chinese jurisdiction in the US, unless on by treaty - again meaning embassies and other facilities as agreed to by treaty.

According to your logic, US citizens are not subject to US jurisdiction while living in a different country. Does this mean that they are no longer US citizens?

 

[Rawley]

Kim's parents were here illegally

Nope.

 

[Stryder50]

Your exclusions prove my argument.
And there wasn't the amount of immigration? Irish and Swearthy German types were swarming from ships. Chinese were coming in on the West Coast.

NOPE !
Greed and treason prove your argument.

The swarms of immigration began a decade or two after 1868 when 14th was ratified.

My comment on lack of real identification papers still applies. Many foreign names were changed and "Americanized" as those 'immigrants' went through immigration and custom as it was in the late 19th century. Many got turned back, mostly due to illness/disease, had to return to nation of origin.

The was no "Welfare" back then, nothing to scam, no freebie hand-outs. The immigrants back then came to work, earn their way, and remain to become citizens.

Also, as I said, there was no real tourist industry back then. Only tourists were the wealthy.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

FFS

Biden picked her exactly because he knew she was unqualified

 

[progressive hunter]

Biden picked her exactly because he knew she was unqualified

IDK,,
she did make the best argument to end birth right citizenship for illegals and birth tourism,,

 

[Stryder50]

Your statement has less than nothing to do with mine, except that:

If illegal aliens aren't subject to our jurisdiction, they are literally not illegal, as our laws and legal system do not apply to them.
Every court must have jurisdiction over the subject matter (in this case persons) to hear and adjudicate a case.

Dost thou seeith thine error?

Dost thou fail to seeith the language usage for the term "jurisdiction" as applied 160 years ago ?
There was little to no documentation (photo ID) to prove citizenship back then so the term jurisdiction seemed more applicable at the time.

 

[Stryder50]

IDK,,
she did make the best argument to end birth right citizenship for illegals and birth tourism,,

Refresh us on that please. What did she say ?

 

[progressive hunter]

Refresh us on that please. What did she say ?

its not 100% but she all but says to be a visitor and break our laws takes them outside our jurisdiction,,
using allegiance as a factor is a little off putting, it should have been illegal intent,,

STUPID VIDEO – Biden’s DEI Justice makes ridiculous justification for birthright citizenship – The Right Scoop

therightscoop.com

 

[progressive hunter]

The SCOTUS ruling is going to disappoint you.

why do you always run away when your narrative cant be defended

 

[Zincwarrior]

why do you always run away when your narrative cant be defended

“Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof”: The Indian Law Context - NYU Law Review

Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment provides that “[a]ll 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.” Much of the debate over the meaning of this provision in the nineteenth...

nyulawreview.org

 

[progressive hunter]

“Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof”: The Indian Law Context - NYU Law Review

Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment provides that “[a]ll 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.” Much of the debate over the meaning of this provision in the nineteenth...

nyulawreview.org

thanks for your opinion article but,,

why do foreign countrys have embassys and consulates in the USA??

they have them because foreigners are under the jurisdiction of their home country and only subject to our laws while they are here,,
just like americans are under the jurisdiction of the USA while in other contrys but are subject to their laws,,



are they a person before they are born??
the 14th says they are,,

 

[Zincwarrior]

why do foreign countrys have embassys and consulates in the USA??

they have them because foreigners are under the jurisdiction of their home country and only subject to our laws while they are here,,
just like americans are under the jurisdiction of the USA while in other contrys but are subject to their laws,,



are they a person before they are born??
the 14th says they are,,

And outside the embassy they are still subject to US laws. Therefor they are subject and babies born from them are citizens per our Consititution.

 

[progressive hunter]

And outside the embassy they are still subject to US laws. Therefor they are subject and babies born from them are citizens per our Consititution.

exactly,, subject to all laws,,

thats not jurisdiction,,

which would prove children born from illegals and those intent on defrauding the USA with birth tourism are not citizens,,

you didnt answer WHY foreign countrys have embassys and consulates in the US

 

[jacksonlamb]

Link to a reliable source please.

So, you prefer them to look at the Constitution like liberals do, rather than what the text actually says?

stryder50 The text of that amendment is ambiguous and using term/language of @ 160 years ago, which 'translates' differently today.
Look at what and how those words were used back then and it's more clear.
Note also back then there was no photo ID of passports with photo and visa, etc.
Also, almost no other nation grants "birthright citizenship".

jackson lamb AdmiralrockwellTory has no idea what he is talking about. He is rephrasing the argument used in court yesterday by the Plaintif, and the court did everything but laugh.

 

[progressive hunter]

almost no other nation grants "birthright citizenship".

for clarification,
no other country allows birthright citizenship for people in the country illegally or under false pretense like birth tourism,,

most countries have some form of it otherwise,,