Birthright Citizenship…Arguments to begin this week at the Supreme Court.

[postman]

Might as well say since the baby from an illegal mom is magically a citizen then the birthing mom is also
But, we don’t

When their baby graduates from Harvard with a degree, we don't give a degree to the mother in that case either.

 

[Delldude]

The Constitution grants "citizens" the right to vote not "people"

We the people....

granted by the states since before the united states became the united states. Their citizens became united states citizens when the union was formed.

Wrong again.

 

[postman]

Lib loons have long contended that illegals have the same constitutional protections that citizens do.

Where the constitution grants a right to "persons", it all persons, great and small, legal and illegal.

 

[Care4all]

You need to do some more research.....Kim Ark Wong was the basis for establishing BRC.

Birthright citizenship, juris soli, was established before we became a nation and were colonies and CONTINUED after the Revolutionary war, when we became a Nation, up to Kim Ark Wong and afterwards to this day.

 

[Rawley]

Because, as the Fourteenth Amendment and prior Civil rights bill, and even during all of our early years after the Rev War, clearly states, she has birthright citizenship by being born to any foreign alien that is free, not a diplomat or ambassador of a foreign nation, not a child of an enemy during war or squirmish, and not a native American.

Again your reasoning is circular, 'she is subject to our jurisdiction, because she is born here "

 

[postman]

We the people....

Some articles and amendments refer to people (persons)
while others refer to citizens.

Don't confuse the two.

 

[Rawley]

Birthright citizenship, juris soli, was established before we became a nation and were colonies and CONTINUED after the Revolutionary war, when we became a Nation, up to Kim Ark Wong and afterwards to this day.

If that was true, Native Americans and slave would have been citizens and the 14th Amendment would have been unnecessary as far as citizenship goes.

 

[postman]

Again your reasoning is circular, 'she is subject to our jurisdiction, because she is born here "

She was also born of people who were subject to our jurisdiction.

So jurisdiction begets jurisdiction.

 

[WEATHER53]

14th amendment
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.

It says persons, not citizens.

Because they considered no one other than citizens and had no illegal aliens to be considered.

 

[postman]

If that was true, Native Americans and slave would have been citizens and the 14th Amendment would have been unnecessary as far as citizenship goes.

Nattve Americas weren't covered by the 14th amendment. They remained part of the 3/5ths compromise if they remained outside our jurisdiction and were not taxed.

 

[Rawley]

She was also born of people who were subject to our jurisdiction.

So jurisdiction begets jurisdiction.

Are they? Or are they "within" our jurisdiction. Explain the difference Ratty.

 

[Rawley]

Nattve Americas weren't covered by the 14th amendment.

They were certainly covered by jus soli, which is Care's argument.

 

[postman]

If that was true, Native Americans and slave would have been citizens and the 14th Amendment would have been unnecessary as far as citizenship goes.

Slaves were excluded from being persons because of Dred Scott. Which went down in history as one of the worse USSC decisions in history.

 

[Care4all]

Again your reasoning is circular, 'she is subject to our jurisdiction, because she is born here "

sorry ...if I wasn't clear....

No, what I am saying is under the example, her parents or parent, were under (or subject to)our jurisdiction when she was born on our soil, thus she, is a citizen at birth....her parents are still alien foreigners, but the child born is not a foreigner, she is a citizen at birth.

 

[postman]

Because they considered no one other than citizens and had no illegal aliens to be considered.

Slaves brought into the US after 1809 were "illegal"

 

[Delldude]

Some articles and amendments refer to people (persons)
while others refer to citizens.

Don't confuse the two.

Dude, you're the one bouncing off the ceiling with misinterpretations.

 

[Rawley]

Slaves were excluded from being persons because of Dred Scott. Which went down in history as one of the worse USSC decisions in history.

So jus soli wasn't the law of the land.

 

[Rambunctious]

Around 20 or more Nations have some form of birthright citizenship... or jus soli... but they all have severe restrictions and rules of who qualifies... like the parents must be in the country legally for a certain number of years before their children can qualify... in other words you can't sneak into their country and go to a hospital shoot out a baby and its a citizen... that only happens here...

 

[Paleman]

They don't. Just the US citizen, unless the deported family chooses to take him with them.

There you go again. If you do have any common sense, you have to know that the government is not going to deport the parents, leaving the US citizen child to fend for itself. Once the kid is born to an illegal immigrant, they all get to stay. Wise up!!!

 

[Delldude]

Birthright citizenship, juris soli, was established before we became a nation and were colonies and CONTINUED after the Revolutionary war, when we became a Nation, up to Kim Ark Wong and afterwards to this day.

Wasn't formalized as a right until 1898.