Business Insider misleads its readers on birthright citizenship.

[pknopp]

Stolen Citizenship Cancels the Votes of Real Americans

It's not about some slippery lawyer-language.. It's the irrefutable logic that someone can't get a legal right through illegal means.

A person is responsible for the sins of their father?

 

[Unkotare]

Anchor babies are a fairly small number, right? Fix.your.border please.

There is no such thing as an “anchor baby.”

 

[Rawley]

Congress must change the Amendment, no other whey can it be done.

President stops issuing SSNs to babies of illegals.

 

[Rawley]

8 U.S. Code § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth

www.law.cornell.edu

No other country has jurisdiction in the US.

But plenty of people that the US doesn't (didn't) have jurisdiction over when they are in the US, even if born here.

 

[surada]

Stolen Citizenship Cancels the Votes of Real Americans

It's not about some slippery lawyer-language.. It's the irrefutable logic that someone can't get a legal right through illegal means.

What is stolen citizenship? There's no such thing. Some professions require critical thinking skills.

 

[Rawley]

With exceptions, also written in to the amendment.

Where are these exceptions written in the 14th Amendment?

 

[surada]

But plenty of people that the US doesn't (didn't) have jurisdiction over when they are in the US, even if born here.

If they're on US soil they are under US jurisdiction. Learn to read the law and statutes.

 

[surada]

Where are these exceptions written in the 14th Amendment?

Diplomats and some native Americans. Critical thinking skills help.

 

[Rawley]

If they're on US soil they are under US jurisdiction.

Nope. You already listed one exception

Learn to read the law and statutes.

Stop the condescending prick act and you might learn something

 

[Rawley]

Diplomats and some native Americans. Critical thinking skills help.

Reading is fundamental.

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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

[surada]

Nope. You already listed one exception


Stop the condescending prick act and you might learn somehting

Haven't you read the statute?
You're at a disadvantage. You haven't read the law and you have zero critical thinking skills.

 

[Rawley]

Haven't you read the statute?
You're at a disadvantage. You haven't read the law and you have zero critical thinking skills.

Wow, really? Do you always get this pissy when you are proven wrong?

The rest of us here are discussing the import of the phrase ". . . and subject to the jurisdiction thereof . . . ". contained in the 14th Amendment.

Let us know when you want to join that discussion.

 

[surada]

Wow, really? Do you always get this pissy when you are proven wrong?

The rest of us here are discussing the import of the phrase "". . . and subject to the jurisdiction thereof . . . ". contained in the 14th Amendment.

Let us know when you want to join that discussion.

Ask a lawyer to read the statute to you .

 

[Rawley]

Ask a lawyer to read the statute to you .

LOL. Enough condescension and pretentiousness fueled by impenetrable ignorance for one day.

Have a blessed day.

 

[surada]

LOL. Enough condescension and pretentiousness fueled by impenetrable ignorance for one day.

Have a blessed day.

Stay stupid.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Anchor babies are a fairly small number, right? Fix.your.border please.

Americans simply don't have the guts or they do not care to do a thing about our southern border.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Wow, really? Do you always get this pissy when you are proven wrong?

The rest of us here are discussing the import of the phrase ". . . and subject to the jurisdiction thereof . . . ". contained in the 14th Amendment.

Let us know when you want to join that discussion.

Anyone in the US who is not a diplomat is subject to US and state jurisdiction. You cannot change that, Rawley.

 

[johnwk]

There is no such thing as an “anchor baby.”

.

 

[johnwk]

As posted BEFORE....

And you were wrong as per our Supreme Court and those who framed and debated the Fourteenth Amendment. I wrote:

No confusing on this end with regard to the Oath. Keep in mind our Supreme Court in the Slaughterhouse Cases 83 U.S. 36, 73 (1873) wrote: “[t]he phrase, ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of … citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States .”

And how does a foreign national become subject to the jurisdiction of the United States under which birthright citizenship would be granted to a child born to a foreign national while on American soil? By first, and formally, taking our nation's Oath of Allegiance and becoming a citizen of the United States, and not owing allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty.

And John A. Bingham, considered the architect of the 14th Amendment's first section was very clear on this requirement who stated on March 9th, 1866, during Congressional debates upon the intended meaning of “jurisdiction” in the following manner:

"I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…" LINK (middle column 1/3 down)

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

johnwk does not understand the 14th.

And you were wrong as per our Supreme Court and those who framed and debated the Fourteenth Amendment. I wrote: