Birthright Citizenship is Teed Up Again

[Rawley]

So would constitutional interpretations be a SCOTUS chore?

~S~

Ultimately

 

[LeroyDumonde]

If someone is on a student visa, are they "subject to US jurisdiction"? How about if they are a tourist?

I wouldn't think so, those folks don't have to pay US income or estate taxes.

If one of them commits a crime can he be arrested and prosecuted?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

If one of them commits a crime can he be arrested and prosecuted?

Of course. Every standing on US soil, citizen or whatever, is subject to federal and state jurisdictions.

 

[LeroyDumonde]

Of course. Every standing on US soil, citizen or whatever, is subject to federal and state jurisdictions.

I asked the question because I already knew the answer.

 

[Arlette]

So would constitutional interpretations be a SCOTUS chore?

~S~

No. The clause in the 14th. Amendment is clear.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

I asked the question because I already knew the answer.

There are many who think non-citizens don't. Wrong.

 

[d0gbreath]

So would constitutional interpretations be a SCOTUS chore?

~S~

They can and do interpret. It takes congress to amend.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Anchor baby citizenship cannot be ended by EO.

 

[Mac-7]

Trump does not have the power to change the Constitution by himself.....

As AZrailwhale points out in post 10, the Constitution does not have to be changed

Already “anyone” does not include anyone

The children of diplomats are not US citizens

And thats an exception by law not written into the Constitution

We just need for congress to express a few more exceptions

 

[Unkotare]

Anchor baby citizenship cannot be ended by EO.

There's no such thing as an "anchor baby."

 

[Mac-7]

It would have to be a Constitutional Amendment.

And, yes, it is easily and has always be defensible in law.

See post #29

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

As AZrailwhale points out in post 10, the Constitution does not have to be changed

Already “anyone” does not include anyone

The children of diplomats are not US citizens

And thats an exception by law not written into the Constitution

We just need for congress to express a few more exceptions

No, that won't work. You need a new amendment.

 

[the watcher]

Trump does not have the power to change the Constitution by himself.....

The Constitution doesn't have to be changed, it just needs to be defended.

 

[Mac-7]

No, that won't work. You need a new amendment.

I dont think so

 

[Rigby5]

Fact:
The birth right citizenship was meant for the children of slaves, not for the children of illegal aliens.

Since the original Founders mostly came from Europe, it likely referred to immigrants as well.
It was not until we started kicking out the Chinese who build the western half of the Transcontinental Railway, that we started caring about immigration status.

 

[Rigby5]

View attachment 1045393

Wrong.
There is no significant welfare, and the original settlers from Europe found this country to be a utopia compared to the crowded, expensive, and barren places in Europe they came from.
Living off the land is not a hardship but a pleasure.

 

[Rigby5]

The Constitution doesn't have to be changed, it just needs to be defended.

The Constitution intended for easy and unrestricted immigration policies, since more people meant more wealth and power.

 

[Rigby5]

I dont think so

You can't change the interpretation of the 14th amendment regardless of how many may want to.

 

[Rigby5]

Ultimately

But even if the past SCOTUS was wrong in their interpretation of the 14th amendment, the current SCOTUS legally can not change the interpretation.
Law that has been accepted can not be changed except through a new amendment process.

 

[frigidweirdo]

President-elect Donald Trump has announced a day-one policy to end birth citizenship. Currently, under U.S. law, a person is granted U.S. citizenship if they’re born in the country. Trump argues this creates an incentive for illegal immigration, or for a woman to simply travel to the United States from another country when she is pregnant. And if the child is born on American soil, then it opens the door to various social benefits and chain migration. [Not my words].

The operative words in the 14th Amendment are:

"...All persons born...in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

(1) The quoted text is ambiguous. Anyone claiming that it is "clear" or "unambiguous" is simply lying.

(2) The political Left has always maintained the position that the section is rightly understood by ignoring the italicized words above. There is no legitimate principle of document interpretation that suggests ignoring substantive words or clauses to get the true meaning.

(3) The United States law enforcement and immigration authorities have presumed for generations that the quoted section MEANS that anyone born in the U.S. has automatic citizenship, regardless of any other factors.

(4) There is a footnote in a Supreme Court written opinion, composed by Justice Brennan that affirms the Left's interpretation of the clause, but of course that section of the opinion is dicta, and not binding.

(5) The interpretation currently accepted in the U.S. is not only unsupported in law, but it is manifestly foolish. Only a few countries in the world have adopted such foolish rules for citizenship.

It is unclear whether the "accepted meaning" of this section of the 14th Amendment can be changed by an Executive Order, a Federal regulation, a new law, or it would take a Constitutional Amendment. Just as important, even if it is changed one way or another, what does that mean to people who are currently presumed to be citizens whose only claim to citizenship in being born on U.S. soil? What would be the effective date for the "new" policy? Retroactive?

Whenever this issue is raised, the Left goes into shrieks of horror, claiming that the "Constitution" demands this policy, it is settled law, and so on. All bullshit, as you might expect. It has NEVER been definitively, legally, and Constitutionally decided.

It's pretty clear. Anyone born in the US can be a US citizen. If they are not under the jurisdiction of the US, they might not be, but as soon as they go back to the US, they can be if they want to be.