Mark Levin: Congress can end birthright citizenship without amending the Constitution

[Agit8r]

United States v. Wong Kim Ark

Not an illegal, try again.

Under US jurisdiction. This is the ONLY condition necessary. You fail.

"illegal" in illegal alien means against the law...that changes the dynamic entirely.

And yet, being born has never been a crime.

We didn't say THEY were criminals..their PARENTS are...nice try.

Exactly. And yet, no other child of criminals is deprived of citizenry, because likewise, it would be unconstitutional.

 

[OKTexas]

The one case the supreme court considered involved legal aliens, they have never ruled on a case involving criminal aliens. And yes, congress has every right to say illegals do not meet the jurisdictional requirements of the 14th Amendment in our naturalization laws.

That is not their call to make. That's the Supreme's decision.

Actually, no. The determination for how you become a citizen was given to congress….

Nope. It is SCOTUS property.

Nope, read article 1, section 8, clause 4.

The congresses power over naturalization affect only those born outside the United States. Those born here have never needed to be naturalized.

OK what ever.

 

[Rotagilla]

Not an illegal, try again.

Under US jurisdiction. This is the ONLY condition necessary. You fail.

"illegal" in illegal alien means against the law...that changes the dynamic entirely.

And yet, being born has never been a crime.

We didn't say THEY were criminals..their PARENTS are...nice try.

Exactly. And yet, no other child of criminals is deprived of citizenry, because likewise, it would be unconstitutional.

children of criminals who are american citizens are..ready?....citizens...

children of illegals are not citizens.

 

[Agit8r]

children of criminals who are american citizens are..ready?....citizens...

And children born to immigrants who are not criminals?

 

[1stRambo]

Actually, no. The determination for how you become a citizen was given to congress….

Nope. It is SCOTUS property.

Nope, read article 1, section 8, clause 4.

The congresses power over naturalization affect only those born outside the United States. Those born here have never needed to be naturalized.

Yo, if the parents were illegal? Then the Baby is too!

"GTP"

On what grounds?

Yo, last time, the 14th Amendment!

"GTP"

 

[Vigilante]

It is clear the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment had no intention of freely giving away American citizenship to just anyone simply because they may have been born on American soil, something our courts have wrongfully assumed. But what exactly did "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" mean to the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment? Again, we are fortunate to have on record the highest authority to tell us, Sen. Lyman Trumbull, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, author of the Thirteenth Amendment, and the one who inserted the phrase:

[T]he provision is, that 'all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.' That means 'subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.' What do we mean by 'complete jurisdiction thereof?' Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.

 

[Agit8r]

Nope. It is SCOTUS property.

Nope, read article 1, section 8, clause 4.

The congresses power over naturalization affect only those born outside the United States. Those born here have never needed to be naturalized.

Yo, if the parents were illegal? Then the Baby is too!

"GTP"

On what grounds?

Yo, last time, the 14th Amendment!

"GTP"

The Fourteenth Amendment doesn't say anything about illegal immigration!

Because, in 1868 this country had open borders, Yo!

 

[Agit8r]

It is clear the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment had no intention of freely giving away American citizenship to just anyone simply because they may have been born on American soil, something our courts have wrongfully assumed. But what exactly did "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" mean to the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment? Again, we are fortunate to have on record the highest authority to tell us, Sen. Lyman Trumbull, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, author of the Thirteenth Amendment, and the one who inserted the phrase:

[T]he provision is, that 'all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.' That means 'subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.' What do we mean by 'complete jurisdiction thereof?' Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.

They didn't have to "give it away freely"

BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY THE CASE.

 

[Rotagilla]

children of criminals who are american citizens are..ready?....citizens...

And children born to immigrants who are not criminals?

legal immigrants?

 

[Vigilante]

It is clear the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment had no intention of freely giving away American citizenship to just anyone simply because they may have been born on American soil, something our courts have wrongfully assumed. But what exactly did "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" mean to the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment? Again, we are fortunate to have on record the highest authority to tell us, Sen. Lyman Trumbull, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, author of the Thirteenth Amendment, and the one who inserted the phrase:

[T]he provision is, that 'all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.' That means 'subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.' What do we mean by 'complete jurisdiction thereof?' Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.

They didn't have to "give it away freely"

BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY THE CASE.

Guess you still don't understand what jurisdiction means... This is like herding cats!

 

[1stRambo]

Nope, read article 1, section 8, clause 4.

The congresses power over naturalization affect only those born outside the United States. Those born here have never needed to be naturalized.

Yo, if the parents were illegal? Then the Baby is too!

"GTP"

On what grounds?

Yo, last time, the 14th Amendment!

"GTP"

The Fourteenth Amendment doesn't say anything about illegal immigration!

Because, in 1868 this country had open borders, Yo!

Yo, read Vigilante reponse, if that don`t make sense, then nothing will!

"GTP"

 

[Vigilante]

Even the founder of the Progressive party got it!

 

[1stRambo]

Even the founder of the Progressive party got it!

Yo, agree, Harry Reid said something along those lines, until they realized they needed more votes, then his tune changed!!!

"GTP"

 

[JoeMoma]

I think Levin is correct about the original intent of the 14th ammendment and that he is correct that congress has the power to define who falls under the jurisdiction clause of the ammendment. That being said, being correct is useless if those in power disagree. For many years now, the children of illegal immigrants have been given birthright citizenship such that it has been ingrained into immigration law. It is extremely unlikely, in my opinion, that the supreme court will rule otherwise even if a case were to make it to the court.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Bottom line....this country was founded for White people only. Read the text of the 1790 Naturalization Act.

 

[BULLDOG]

I thought right wingers worshipped the unchangable constitution?

what nonsense...prohibition was enacted and then repealed. So much for THAT

Wow. You believe some whiney talk show idiot just found the key that the right has been looking so long for? There are procedures for changing the constitution, but other than that, why hasn't some smart right winger pointed that out before? Could it be that smarter people than you already knew that was there but it didn't hold water?

Quit your crying, you tried to be intellectually dishonest in your post to refute ok's post by just posting the part of the 14th that you agree with.

Guess ok's other post was to long for you to comprehend so you quoted mine.

Nothing dishonest about an answer that covers the question. Obviously the right thinks Levin, or trump, or some other rattlehead found a magic phrase that will solve all your fears and worries about immigration, and I say it won't work. That's about as far as we need to go. If you think your little idea is valid, then you don't need to be wasting time here. Show what kind of a man you are and demand that somebody do something about it. If your little phrase is that forceful and definitive, we should be hearing about congressional hearitngs by tomorrow night.

No I am just pointed out how dishonest the left and you are.

Always post half truths, so you can trick the uninformed, if you say you know the 14th so well you know it was written for slaves, it didn't include Indians or foreign ambassadors children born here.

God damb I personally think some one born on US soil is an American
Like said in this thread in the CDZ

CDZ - Should the U.S. pass the Birthright Citizenship Act? | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

But you just want to attack a talk show host because you don't like information put out there for people to learn more about something? And your refute was to just post part of the 14th amendment?

But hey why should I be surprised that's all your ilk does... Attack messengers and post half truths.

No, My refute was a simple "You're wrong". The 14th is why you are wrong.
OK...I get it. I admit I am not a constitutional scholar and must rely on people who are. You don't really know more about it than I do, but you think some talking head has found a secret phrase that proves all the constitutional scholars wrong. That doesn't sound reasonable to me, but I guess it is for a right winger.

talking head? go read his bio..you're looking pretty ridiculous right about now.
How many cases have YOU argued in the supreme court?
Compare and contrast that with mark levin....you lose.

Believe what you want. Levin is nothing more than another Morton Downey Jr. of Jerry Springer. Appeals to only the simple minded.

 

[Rotagilla]

I thought right wingers worshipped the unchangable constitution?

what nonsense...prohibition was enacted and then repealed. So much for THAT

Quit your crying, you tried to be intellectually dishonest in your post to refute ok's post by just posting the part of the 14th that you agree with.

Guess ok's other post was to long for you to comprehend so you quoted mine.

Nothing dishonest about an answer that covers the question. Obviously the right thinks Levin, or trump, or some other rattlehead found a magic phrase that will solve all your fears and worries about immigration, and I say it won't work. That's about as far as we need to go. If you think your little idea is valid, then you don't need to be wasting time here. Show what kind of a man you are and demand that somebody do something about it. If your little phrase is that forceful and definitive, we should be hearing about congressional hearitngs by tomorrow night.

No I am just pointed out how dishonest the left and you are.

Always post half truths, so you can trick the uninformed, if you say you know the 14th so well you know it was written for slaves, it didn't include Indians or foreign ambassadors children born here.

God damb I personally think some one born on US soil is an American
Like said in this thread in the CDZ

CDZ - Should the U.S. pass the Birthright Citizenship Act? | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

But you just want to attack a talk show host because you don't like information put out there for people to learn more about something? And your refute was to just post part of the 14th amendment?

But hey why should I be surprised that's all your ilk does... Attack messengers and post half truths.

No, My refute was a simple "You're wrong". The 14th is why you are wrong.
OK...I get it. I admit I am not a constitutional scholar and must rely on people who are. You don't really know more about it than I do, but you think some talking head has found a secret phrase that proves all the constitutional scholars wrong. That doesn't sound reasonable to me, but I guess it is for a right winger.

talking head? go read his bio..you're looking pretty ridiculous right about now.
How many cases have YOU argued in the supreme court?
Compare and contrast that with mark levin....you lose.

Believe what you want. Levin is nothing more than another Morton Downey Jr. of Jerry Springer. Appeals to only the simple minded.

LMAO..so you didn't read his bio.
You're clueless, then...and you look pretty ridiculous now, too.

 

[BULLDOG]

I thought right wingers worshipped the unchangable constitution?

what nonsense...prohibition was enacted and then repealed. So much for THAT

Nothing dishonest about an answer that covers the question. Obviously the right thinks Levin, or trump, or some other rattlehead found a magic phrase that will solve all your fears and worries about immigration, and I say it won't work. That's about as far as we need to go. If you think your little idea is valid, then you don't need to be wasting time here. Show what kind of a man you are and demand that somebody do something about it. If your little phrase is that forceful and definitive, we should be hearing about congressional hearitngs by tomorrow night.

No I am just pointed out how dishonest the left and you are.

Always post half truths, so you can trick the uninformed, if you say you know the 14th so well you know it was written for slaves, it didn't include Indians or foreign ambassadors children born here.

God damb I personally think some one born on US soil is an American
Like said in this thread in the CDZ

CDZ - Should the U.S. pass the Birthright Citizenship Act? | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

But you just want to attack a talk show host because you don't like information put out there for people to learn more about something? And your refute was to just post part of the 14th amendment?

But hey why should I be surprised that's all your ilk does... Attack messengers and post half truths.

No, My refute was a simple "You're wrong". The 14th is why you are wrong.
OK...I get it. I admit I am not a constitutional scholar and must rely on people who are. You don't really know more about it than I do, but you think some talking head has found a secret phrase that proves all the constitutional scholars wrong. That doesn't sound reasonable to me, but I guess it is for a right winger.

talking head? go read his bio..you're looking pretty ridiculous right about now.
How many cases have YOU argued in the supreme court?
Compare and contrast that with mark levin....you lose.

Believe what you want. Levin is nothing more than another Morton Downey Jr. of Jerry Springer. Appeals to only the simple minded.

LMAO..so you didn't read his bio.
You're clueless, then...and you look pretty ridiculous now, too.

One of us does.

 

[Rotagilla]

I thought right wingers worshipped the unchangable constitution?

what nonsense...prohibition was enacted and then repealed. So much for THAT

No I am just pointed out how dishonest the left and you are.

Always post half truths, so you can trick the uninformed, if you say you know the 14th so well you know it was written for slaves, it didn't include Indians or foreign ambassadors children born here.

God damb I personally think some one born on US soil is an American
Like said in this thread in the CDZ

CDZ - Should the U.S. pass the Birthright Citizenship Act? | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

But you just want to attack a talk show host because you don't like information put out there for people to learn more about something? And your refute was to just post part of the 14th amendment?

But hey why should I be surprised that's all your ilk does... Attack messengers and post half truths.

No, My refute was a simple "You're wrong". The 14th is why you are wrong.
OK...I get it. I admit I am not a constitutional scholar and must rely on people who are. You don't really know more about it than I do, but you think some talking head has found a secret phrase that proves all the constitutional scholars wrong. That doesn't sound reasonable to me, but I guess it is for a right winger.

talking head? go read his bio..you're looking pretty ridiculous right about now.
How many cases have YOU argued in the supreme court?
Compare and contrast that with mark levin....you lose.

Believe what you want. Levin is nothing more than another Morton Downey Jr. of Jerry Springer. Appeals to only the simple minded.

LMAO..so you didn't read his bio.
You're clueless, then...and you look pretty ridiculous now, too.

One of us does.

yes indeed....you really stepped in it this time.

 

[Jackson]

Of course it effects their children, they cannot confer birth right citizenship if they aren't citizens themselves and owe allegiance to a foreign government. Read the link I provided.

This is idiotic thinking.

With this stupid claim of yours, you can't argue that a legal resident's kid is a citizen and an illegal resident's kid is not, because then you would have to hold the ridiculous belief the resident here on a visa does not owe allegiance to a foreign government and an illegal resident does.

As I said, the links I provided make it very clear that allegiance to a foreign government is a term reserved for ambassadors and foreign ministers.

Provide the entire sentence...
"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,