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

[Couchpotato]

Our laws protect her from the moment of birthing, when on our soil. She is under our jurisdiction and thus our laws and protection.

That can be said of literally everyone here in the US even diplomats. We can all agree that the term jurisdiction means different things with regards to citizens and non-citizens here in the US and for non-citizens those here legally vs illegally.

 

[Scoutster]

The majority won’t. That is fact.

 

[g5000]

Slaves brought into the US after 1809 were "illegal"

After 1807, but otherwise correct.

Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[postman]

OK Why do you think an illegal alien is "subject to" our jurisdiction? Don't get confused with "within" our jurisdiction which gives them certain rights and allows us to put them jail.

As usual you have it backwards.
To be put in jail, you have to be subject to our jurisdiction.
Diplomats can be within our jurisdiction, and we can't legally touch them.

 

[postman]

The others have enough fortitude to not undermine themselves. We cater too much to wishes and feelings

Only three countries currently have the right to keep and bear arms enshrined in their constitutions: Guatemala, Mexico, and the United States.

 

[Care4all]

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.

We had the 3 exceptions, children of foreign alien diplomats etc, warring enemies and children of Native Americans who were under tribal jurisdiction and tribal governance, not U.S. laws....PRIOR TO THE 14TH.

You are NOT reading the decisions by judges and justices that I have been posting that CLEARLY, WITHOUT ANY QUESTION, establishes birthright citizenship PRIOR TO the 14th Amendment....from our inception as a nation...Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story has some strong decisions and writings on it...

Jus Soli was established as Colonies, and continued when we became a Nation. It is NOT new, or created via the 14th....it was established from our Nation's creation.

What the 14th did, was establish that previous Slaves had the same birthright citizenship that was already established, for everyone else,

and put a STOP to the wrongly decided Dred Scott decision.

 

[postman]

Stay away from apples to tire irons

People who illegally enter the country are illegal's.

As were all slaves after 1809. 1807

Yet the 14th amendment made their children born in the US, into US citizens, despite having entered the country illegally.

Let that sink in.

 

[Zincwarrior]

They used a questionable immigration model that nobody else uses.

I consulted the Kiowa nation. They believe there are ~330MM illegal aliens in the US.

 

[postman]

That can be said of literally everyone here in the US even diplomats. We can all agree that the term jurisdiction means different things with regards to citizens and non-citizens here in the US and for non-citizens those here legally vs illegally.

Diplomats are subject to our protection, but are not subject to our jurisdiction.

 

[Delldude]

Within our jurisdiction indicates where they are. Like being within California's jurisdiction.

Subject to our jurisdiction, denotes having legal authority over them.

So a diplomat stationed in the US is within our jurisdiction, but not subject to our jurisdiction.

Referring to law, not sovereignty.

 

[postman]

That can be said of literally everyone here in the US even diplomats. We can all agree that the term jurisdiction means different things with regards to citizens and non-citizens here in the US and for non-citizens those here legally vs illegally.

AI Overview

No, the US does not have jurisdiction over diplomats, except in limited circumstances. Diplomats, particularly those with diplomatic agent-level immunity, are generally immune from criminal, civil, and administrative jurisdiction in the host country. This immunity is granted to protect them from interference in their official duties and to facilitate diplomatic relations.

 

[postman]

Referring to law, not sovereignty.

Sovereignty is law.

AI Overview

Sovereignty, particularly in the context of states, is often viewed as the ultimate authority within a territory, while law provides the framework for how that authority is exercised. In essence, sovereignty is about who holds the power, while law defines how that power is used. While they are distinct concepts, they are also intertwined, with sovereignty often being seen as the bedrock upon which legal systems are built.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Wong is the only one on point. And in Wong, the parents were permanent legal residents.

You're arguing Wong is wrong and not wight?

 

[bendog]

After 1807, but otherwise correct.

Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yeah, but we already had a "surplus" of slaves, and they could be, and were, "bred."

And that's why there's a 14th amendment.

 

[BrokeLoser]

As usual you have it backwards.
To be put in jail, you have to be subject to our jurisdiction.
Diplomats can be within our jurisdiction, and we can't legally touch them.

You are confusing/conflating legal jurisdiction with ‘jurisdiction’ as used in the Constitution.

 

[postman]

Yeah, but we already had a "surplus" of slaves, and they could be, and were, "bred."

And that's why there's a 14th amendment.

But some of those slaves were "illegals"
And those "illegals" had birthright citizenship.

 

[Rawley]

You're arguing Wong is wrong and not wight?

Cowwect.

 

[Kondor3]

The anchor baby interpretation is by the "clear text" of the 14th amendment.
Not the intent, but the clear text.

Oh, there are several ways to spin that, your OWN interpretation here notwithstanding...

 

[Kondor3]

Unlikely they will or can.

That's what the next round of SCOTUS activity in that context will tell us.

A constitutional amendment would need to be done, to change it.

Only if the SCOTUS ruling goes against the Administration.

I've seen no legal argument made to support what president Trump's side is arguing...

Their arguments will be (a) intent [re: former slaves] and (b) permanent (vs. casual/temporary) jurisdiction, I expect.

But here's the thing....there is no super duper rush

There is, indeed, a "rush" if the American People wish to eject some 20,000,000 Illegal Aliens already present upon US soil.

Remember... the stated goal is to (1) eject the Bad Guys first, THEN (2) eject the rest.

 

[postman]

Oh, there are several ways to spin that, your OWN interpretation here notwithstanding...

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866, and ratified July 9, 1868,

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.