Conservative from Georgia
Diamond Member
- Oct 24, 2018
- 4,173
- 3,555
- 1,938
- Thread starter
- #21
If he were 173 years old, yes.
Which one? The diplomat or the illegal immigrant?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If he were 173 years old, yes.
If they were being so clear about it only applying to freed black slaves, why is that not mentioned in the 14th?The Sponsors of the 14th amendment made it clear the juisdiction applies to Americans blacks who were just freed from slavery but were still non citizens which is the main reason why this amenment was created.
They also stated it wasn't for illegal aliens as their jurisdiction is in another country thus doesn't qualify.
This is 101 stuff that removes the absurd birthright citizenship bullshit for babies of ILLEGAL alien parents.
Stop lying. They did not state anything about “illegal immigrants.”
And you have not answer whether the foreign diplomat or his children born here would’ve been in USA jurisdiction back then.
The 14th was put in place to address the citizenship of slaves. PERIOD.Before the Civil War, there were no restrictions on who could enter the country (as far as I know, correct me if I'm wrong). Therefore, when a citizen of another country did enter, they voluntarily placed themselves under the jurisdiction of the United States and the state in which they entered.
Now that we have restrictions on who can enter, and how they are allowed to do it, a foreigner who enters illegally is specifically dodging United States jurisdiction and remains a foreigner unlawfully present. Not at all who the framers of the 14th Amendment envisioned protecting.
You just stated that any immigrant would’ve been under USA jurisdiction.There weren't any....Therefore there was no such thing as an "illegal immigrant"....You committed a crime and they prosecuted you regardless.
Demonstrating that the OP is completely out of his league.
It doesn’t say so in the text. And they never said that was the only kind of person to whom it would apply.The 14th was put in place to address the citizenship of slaves. PERIOD.
There was no "USA jurisdiction" back then, ignorant jackass.You just stated that any immigrant would’ve been under USA jurisdiction.
Who would’ve thought my biggest ally in this thread was Oddball himself. (don’t forget to answer about the diplomat.)
Jose Perez.Which one? The diplomat or the illegal immigrant?
you are lying about the sponsors saying it was only for black slaves. Tell me where they said that.LOL, you have no idea what the SPONSORS of the 14 amendment stated, I am telling the truth and your ignorance is exposed.
So if a non-diplomat foreigner had killed somebody that USA didn’t have the right to prosecute him?Jose Perez
The reason why you’re not quoting the sponsors is that you lied about them saying anything about the amendment being only for slaves or freed slaves.LOL, you have no idea what the SPONSORS of the 14 amendment stated, I am telling the truth and your ignorance is exposed.
So when they wrote “under their jurisdiction thereof”, were they drunk?There was no "USA jurisdiction" back then, ignorant jackass.
So **** off.
you are lying about the sponsors saying it was only for black slaves. Tell me where they said that.
You didn’t quote the 14th amendment.I see the typical ignorance from leftist democrats who don't have a clue about the history that created the amendment as Brittanica shows clearly it was for black people who were newly freed.
Fourteenth Amendment
United States Constitution
Excerpt:
Fourteenth Amendment, amendment (1868) to the Constitution of the United States that granted citizenship and equal civil and legal rights to African Americans and slaves who had been emancipated after the American Civil War, including them under the umbrella phrase “all persons born or naturalized in the United States.” In all, the amendment comprises five sections, four of which began in 1866 as separate proposals that stalled in legislative process and were later amalgamated, along with a fifth enforcement section, into a single amendment.
LINK
Wait. Why didn’t you quote the sponsors or the amendment itself? You’re in shaky grounds.LOL you are so freaking ignorant as I just destroyed you using the Brittanica link showing it was chiefly designed for newly freed blacks.
You need to slow down.
It doesn't say "USA citizen", ******* nincompoop.
Prior to the 14th Amendment, you were a citizen of the State wherein you resided...There was no such thing as a federal "US citizen"
l didn't answer your loaded question because the entire premise is just shitlib bait.
WTF are you saying? Do you read your asinine posts?So if a non-diplomat foreigner had killed somebody that USA didn’t have the right to prosecute him?
There’s nothing to say. You told us that an immigrant back then was under the jurisdiction of the United States, because he could be prosecuted, but a foreign diplomat or his children were not. That’s all.WTF are you saying? Do you read your asinine posts?