Here is a common sense analysis of the 14th amendment and how LBJ exploited it to create "Anchor Babies".

[MarathonMike]

The 14th amendment was crafted SPECIFICALLY to insure that the rights of newly freed slaves and their offspring were protected. Period. There was no formal immigration policy in 1868 and thus no such thing as an illegal alien or an "anchor baby". A hundred years later that all changed under The Immigration Act of 1965 signed by (guess who?) LBJ.

In 1965, the US Congress passed the Immigration Act and LBJ signed it. Under a loophole in its provisions, when read in conjunction with the 14th Amendment, any babies born on US soil have automatic American citizenship, whether or not their parents were in the country illegally.

This is yet another example of how Democrats corrupt the Constitution and create laws that clearly fly in the face of Constitutional Intent.

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution, apportionment, slavery slaves citizenship vote

www.14thamendment.us

 

[Winston]

The 14th amendment was crafted SPECIFICALLY to insure that the rights of newly freed slaves and their offspring were protected. Period. There was no formal immigration policy in 1868 and thus no such thing as an illegal alien or an "anchor baby". A hundred years later that all changed under The Immigration Act of 1965 signed by (guess who?) LBJ.

In 1965, the US Congress passed the Immigration Act and LBJ signed it. Under a loophole in its provisions, when read in conjunction with the 14th Amendment, any babies born on US soil have automatic American citizenship, whether or not their parents were in the country illegally.

This is yet another example of how Democrats corrupt the Constitution and create laws that clearly fly in the face of Constitutional Intent.

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution, apportionment, slavery slaves citizenship vote

www.14thamendment.us

Please, birthright citizenship was established by US v. Wong Kim Ark---IN FLIPPIN 1898.

 

[DGS49]

A USSC decision CANNOT CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION. Sorry.

Birthright citizenship is INSANE, and could be defeated by legislation.

How that leaves the people who were given citizenship simply for being born here would have to be resolved separately, but I doubt that citizenship would be revoked or nullified. This would only be prospective.

The real question for today is, once these thirty million fake asylum bastards are given full citizenship (if Biden gets a second term), what will prevent them from bringing in their wives, kids, parents, siblings, etc.?

HINT: Nothing.

 

[MarathonMike]

Please, birthright citizenship was established by US v. Wong Kim Ark---IN FLIPPIN 1898.

That was a special case for that one Chinese individual. There were specific EXCLUSION laws for Chinese such as the 1924 Immigration Act. Just like the 14th Amendment the Wong Kim Ark ruling was never INTENDED to be rubber stamp citizenship for any baby born to any illegal alien under any circumstances. That is where the post 1960 Democrats screwed America and laid the groundwork for the illegal invasion we are under now.

 

[Winston]

That was a special case for that one Chinese individual. There were specific EXCLUSION laws for Chinese such as the 1924 Immigration Act. Just like the 14th Amendment the Wong Kim Ark ruling was never INTENDED to be rubber stamp citizenship for any baby born to any illegal alien under any circumstances. That is where the post 1960 Democrats screwed America and laid the groundwork for the illegal invasion we are under now.

Quit being stupid, read the ruling.

Whatever considerations, in the absence of a controlling provision of the Constitution, might influence the legislative or the executive branch of the Government to decline to admit persons of the Chinese race to the status of citizens of the United States, there are none that can constrain or permit the judiciary to refuse to give full effect to the peremptory and explicit language of the Fourteenth Amendment, which declares and ordains that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark | Constitution Center

National Constitution Center Supreme Court Case Library: United States v. Wong Kim Ark

constitutioncenter.org

 

[jwoodie]

There is no constitutional basis for "birthright citizenship." The Constitution clearly specifies that children of foreign diplomats (i.e., not permanent residents) are not considered to be natural born citizens. Neither are the children of illegal aliens, who are not permanent residents of the US.

 

[80zephyr]

Quit being stupid, read the ruling.

Whatever considerations, in the absence of a controlling provision of the Constitution, might influence the legislative or the executive branch of the Government to decline to admit persons of the Chinese race to the status of citizens of the United States, there are none that can constrain or permit the judiciary to refuse to give full effect to the peremptory and explicit language of the Fourteenth Amendment, which declares and ordains that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark | Constitution Center

National Constitution Center Supreme Court Case Library: United States v. Wong Kim Ark

constitutioncenter.org

Senator Jacob Howard (Michigan) in 1866, co-author of the 14th amendment wrote 'this will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States'.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

The 14th amendment was crafted SPECIFICALLY to insure that the rights of newly freed slaves and their offspring were protected. Period. There was no formal immigration policy in 1868 and thus no such thing as an illegal alien or an "anchor baby". A hundred years later that all changed under The Immigration Act of 1965 signed by (guess who?) LBJ.

In 1965, the US Congress passed the Immigration Act and LBJ signed it. Under a loophole in its provisions, when read in conjunction with the 14th Amendment, any babies born on US soil have automatic American citizenship, whether or not their parents were in the country illegally.

This is yet another example of how Democrats corrupt the Constitution and create laws that clearly fly in the face of Constitutional Intent.

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution, apportionment, slavery slaves citizenship vote

www.14thamendment.us

Wily Wits Wearing Wigs

That's consistent with the devious purpose of the ruling class's Constitution. Quit supporting that elitist manifesto.

 

[Winston]

Senator Jacob Howard (Michigan) in 1866, co-author of the 14th amendment wrote 'this will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States'.

Did the author of the Citizenship Clause really say it would exclude the children of "foreigners"?

Right-wing media have claimed that Sen. Jacob Howard, the author of the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause, said that it would not apply to the children of "foreigners." However, scholars dispute this interpretation of Howard's remarks; and the Supreme Court noted in 1898 that the white...

www.mediamatters.org

 

[80zephyr]

Did the author of the Citizenship Clause really say it would exclude the children of "foreigners"?

Right-wing media have claimed that Sen. Jacob Howard, the author of the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause, said that it would not apply to the children of "foreigners." However, scholars dispute this interpretation of Howard's remarks; and the Supreme Court noted in 1898 that the white...

www.mediamatters.org

So,if they dispute the statement, the SCOTUS could indeed rule that anchor babies are not allowed.

 

[Winston]

So,if they dispute the statement, the SCOTUS could indeed rule that anchor babies are not allowed.

To make that ruling would mean that the illegal immigrants that had those children DO NOT fall under the jurisdiction of the United States. Illegal immigrant kills someone in a DWI incident, sure you can deport him, but you can't prosecute him. Same for shoplifting, speeding, hell, even jay walking.

Under the 14th amendment only children born to foreign ambassadors, or native americans on a reservation, were not entitled to citizenship. In both cases, the parents do not fall under the jurisdiction of the United States. The Native American issue was resolved some years later. Do we really want to give illegal immigrants the same immunity granted to foreign ambassadors? I mean you people really don't think things through.

 

[JoeB131]

The 14th amendment was crafted SPECIFICALLY to insure that the rights of newly freed slaves and their offspring were protected. Period. There was no formal immigration policy in 1868 and thus no such thing as an illegal alien or an "anchor baby". A hundred years later that all changed under The Immigration Act of 1965 signed by (guess who?) LBJ.

In 1965, the US Congress passed the Immigration Act and LBJ signed it. Under a loophole in its provisions, when read in conjunction with the 14th Amendment, any babies born on US soil have automatic American citizenship, whether or not their parents were in the country illegally.

This is yet another example of how Democrats corrupt the Constitution and create laws that clearly fly in the face of Constitutional Intent.

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution, apportionment, slavery slaves citizenship vote

www.14thamendment.us

Except the 14th makes no such determination between legal and illegal.

The reality is, up until 1965, if you got here you were in. Oh, there were restriction from countries that weren't considered "White" enough in the 19th century, but immigration was less restrictive before than it is now.

My grandfather immigrated here in 1925 from Germany. By 1929, he had US Citizenship, as did his wife and son. No one questioned whether or not his daughter who was born here was a citizen.

 

[80zephyr]

To make that ruling would mean that the illegal immigrants that had those children DO NOT fall under the jurisdiction of the United States. Illegal immigrant kills someone in a DWI incident, sure you can deport him, but you can't prosecute him. Same for shoplifting, speeding, hell, even jay walking.

Under the 14th amendment only children born to foreign ambassadors, or native americans on a reservation, were not entitled to citizenship. In both cases, the parents do not fall under the jurisdiction of the United States. The Native American issue was resolved some years later. Do we really want to give illegal immigrants the same immunity granted to foreign ambassadors? I mean you people really don't think things through.

Sure you can jail them. Diplomats are different.

 

[Libby von H]

The 14th amendment was crafted SPECIFICALLY to insure that the rights of newly freed slaves and their offspring were protected. Period. There was no formal immigration policy in 1868 and thus no such thing as an illegal alien or an "anchor baby". A hundred years later that all changed under The Immigration Act of 1965 signed by (guess who?) LBJ.

In 1965, the US Congress passed the Immigration Act and LBJ signed it. Under a loophole in its provisions, when read in conjunction with the 14th Amendment, any babies born on US soil have automatic American citizenship, whether or not their parents were in the country illegally.

This is yet another example of how Democrats corrupt the Constitution and create laws that clearly fly in the face of Constitutional Intent.

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution, apportionment, slavery slaves citizenship vote

www.14thamendment.us

Speaking of that

 

[surada]

A USSC decision CANNOT CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION. Sorry.

Birthright citizenship is INSANE, and could be defeated by legislation.

How that leaves the people who were given citizenship simply for being born here would have to be resolved separately, but I doubt that citizenship would be revoked or nullified. This would only be prospective.

The real question for today is, once these thirty million fake asylum bastards are given full citizenship (if Biden gets a second term), what will prevent them from bringing in their wives, kids, parents, siblings, etc.?

HINT: Nothing.

Read the statute. LBJ had nothing to do with anchor babies.

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

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[surada]

To make that ruling would mean that the illegal immigrants that had those children DO NOT fall under the jurisdiction of the United States. Illegal immigrant kills someone in a DWI incident, sure you can deport him, but you can't prosecute him. Same for shoplifting, speeding, hell, even jay walking.

Under the 14th amendment only children born to foreign ambassadors, or native americans on a reservation, were not entitled to citizenship. In both cases, the parents do not fall under the jurisdiction of the United States. The Native American issue was resolved some years later. Do we really want to give illegal immigrants the same immunity granted to foreign ambassadors? I mean you people really don't think things through.

US law has jurisdiction over anyone on US soil except diplomats.

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

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[Unkotare]

...any babies born on US soil have automatic American citizenship, whether or not their parents were in the country illegally.

...

Which does NOT change the immigration status of said parents.