S.C. believed to lack 5 votes to affirm non-conditional, U.S. birthright citizenship

[g5000]

Meaning anyone that disagrees with your opinion

No. Meaning it is a made up term and has no legal basis.

It's used by bigots.

But they can claim Federal $$$$$$$ until they become 21.

Yes, because they are CITIZENS and can claim federal dollars just like you.

 

[Rawley]

No. Meaning it is a made up term and has no legal basis.

What the hell does "no legal basis" even mean? Odd that it triggers you so.

It's used by bigots.



Yes, because they are CITIZENS and can claim federal dollars just like you.

Well, they are not "just like" me are they? My parents were US citizens. My grandparents were US citizens. My greatgrand parents came here legally and became US citizens through the proper legal naturalization process.

 

[g5000]

Well, they are not "just like" me are they? My parents were US citizens. My grandparents were US citizens. My greatgrand parents came here legally and became US citizens through the proper legal naturalization process.

Your ancestor immigrants were despised as much as you despise the current batch.

I guarantee it. I can show you if you deny it.

Your rhetoric is identical to the Know Nothings who wanted your ancestors banished/forbidden entry. "They bring crime. They're rapists..."

Exact same bullshit, different century.

And yes, children born here are not one bit different than you. Citizenship has ****-all to do with who your ancestors were.

As for the "proper legal process", ICE has been staking out courthouses and ambushing immigrants attempting to use the legal process to stay here.

ICE is grabbing students with legal status literally off the streets for exercising free speech.

That's some real Gestapo shit.

 

[Rawley]

Your ancestor immigrants were despised

And yet they somehow they came her legally and embraced America as their home

as much as you despise the current batch.

Sorry, I don't share your hatred of others. But I don't have much sympathy for those who break the law and are facing the consequences.

I guarantee it. I can show you if you deny it.

Your rhetoric is identical to the Know Nothings who wanted your ancestors banished/forbidden entry. "They bring crime. They're rapists..."

Lose the anger. You make it very difficult to have a civil discussion with you when you translate my use of the common term "anchor baby" to ranting about "rapists.

Exact same bullshit, different century.

And yes, children born here are not one bit different than you. Citizenship has ****-all to do with who your ancestors were.

As for the "proper legal process", ICE has been staking out courthouses and ambushing immigrants attempting to use the legal process to stay here.

ICE is grabbing students with legal status literally off the streets for exercising free speech.

That's some real Gestapo shit.

When they start burning the illegals in ovens by the tens of thousands, let me know. Until then, you have a blessed life. We're done "discussing" this issue.

 

[johnwk]

The next paragraph in your link:

Gonzales, who served in former President George W. Bush's administration, admitted that he had no basis for his speculation, but found it interesting that the Court declined to rule on the "substantive issue" of birthright citizenship put before the justices.


So, basically, Gonzales is speaking out of his ass.

You know who Gonzales is, right? You know how he gained his infamy, right?

He is offering an opinion different from the one spewing from your "ass".

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

I believe the poster has a motive to make the constitution mean what he/she wants the constitution to mean, rather than what its text, and documented legislative intent confirms, which gives context to its text, and actually means.

You just gave away the MAGA long game. You have no care for the text. You want it to say what you want.,

 

[johnwk]

It is very simple, and the creators of the 14th Amendment explained it very simply.

EVERYONE born in the US is automatically a citizen, with the exception of those not under the jurisdiction of the US. And they explained those not under the jurisdiction of the US are obviously diplomats and ambassadors.

I hope this clears your confusion and you are finally able to catch up.

Once again you offer your opinion, and your opinion conflicts with those who actually framed and debated the 14th Amendment, e.g., Senator Bingham, considered the architect of the 14th Amendment's first section, states the following involving the 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

And how may an alien who has entered the United States nullify their allegiance to their home country and submit themselves to the complete jurisdiction of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment, so a child born to such a person becomes a citizen of the United States upon birth?

By taking the following Oath Of Allegiance as prescribed under our law.

“I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen;
that I will support and defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law;
that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law;
that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and
that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God”

By this oath an alien becomes “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. Why is this so difficult for you to understand?

 

[johnwk]

You just gave away the MAGA long game. You have no care for the text. You want it to say what you want.,

What makes a Supreme Court opinion legitimate and in harmony with our system of law is when its opinion is in harmony with the text of our Constitution and its documented legislative intent which gives context to its text.

Our Supreme Court put it this way:



The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it._____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)


.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

What makes a Supreme Court opinion legitimate and in harmony with our system of law is when its opinion is in harmony with the text of our Constitution and its documented legislative intent which gives context to its text.

Our Supreme Court put it this way:



The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it._____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)


.

Your opinion is your hope only.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

SCOTUS is always presumed in harmony with the Constitution when it issues an opinion. They are the ones who determine. You are the one wide-eyed and pearl clutching waiting on it.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Yeah, I did it already, I used the SUPREME COURT in post 5 and 6.

I'll post it again
Well, you have United States vs Wong Kim Ark 169 U.S. 649 (1898) which said:

"[T]he real object of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, in qualifying the words, "All persons born in the United States" by the addition "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," would appear to have been to exclude, by the fewest and fittest words (besides children of members of the Indian tribes, standing in a peculiar relation to the National Government, unknown to the common law), the two classes of cases -- children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation and children of diplomatic representatives of a foreign State -- both of which, as has already been shown, by the law of England and by our own law from the time of the first settlement of the English colonies in America, had been recognized exceptions to the fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the country."

So, everyone gets to be citizens who are born in the US, except for those who are being imprisoned during times of war, ie, prison of war camps and those who are diplomatic kids.

The former are not "legally" in the US, they're POWs. They're not subject to US law, they cannot demand due process, they cannot get anything. They can't get up and walk around and do whatever they want. The second have diplomatic immunity, they're not under the jurisdiction of US law.

So, all babies born under US LAW are given birth citizenship, if they want it.

That passage didnt relate to being "subject to the laws" as the meaning of the word "jurisdiction". Im trying to find where you determined thats what jurisdiction means

 

[johnwk]

Your opinion is your hope only.

Truth and stated facts are not opinion.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Where did they say this? As in, post the source.

Ive asked people to read this before. All of the relevant parts of the senators who debated the amendment, in their own words, are contained within.

 

[Godboy]

It is very simple, and the creators of the 14th Amendment explained it very simply.

EVERYONE born in the US is automatically a citizen, with the exception of those not under the jurisdiction of the US. And they explained those not under the jurisdiction of the US are obviously diplomats and ambassadors.

I hope this clears your confusion and you are finally able to catch up.

Diplomats and ambassadors arent citizens, so you are correct that they cant have babies here who become citizens automatically, but nothing in the 14th limits it to just diplomats and ambassadors. They arent even mentioned in the 14th at all.

 

[frigidweirdo]

What you, and the court in Wong, deliberately ignore is, the law of England as it relates to birthright citizenship, was rejected by adoption of " . . . and subject to the jurisdiction thereof . . . " found in the 14th Amendment.

Huh? I don't comprehend what you want to say

 

[frigidweirdo]

That passage didnt relate to being "subject to the laws" as the meaning of the word "jurisdiction". Im trying to find where you determined thats what jurisdiction means

Jurisdiction essentially means who has the power over a certain area or people.

Every person in the US is under US jurisdiction, expect for diplomats. Diplomats can break the law in the US and they're able to be punished by the US for it, except with expulsion from the country.

POWs are also not tried in courts of law for any crimes they might have committed. They are punished without courts by the military.

That means that diplomats and families with diplomatic immunity, and POWs are not subject to US jurisdiction and are not subject to the laws of the US.

I think this is pretty simple. I'm not sure this is what you're getting at though.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Ive asked people to read this before. All of the relevant parts of the senators who debated the amendment, in their own words, are contained within.

I need the source. Give me the source.

 

[Orangecat]

It sure does until an Amendment is ratified to change it.

Or properly interpreted by the SCOTUS.

 

[johnwk]

Huh? I don't comprehend what you want to say

Did you forget what you posted HERE?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Did you forget what you posted HERE?

Doesn't matter what I posted, it doesn't make SENSE. I'm asking for it to be written again so it MAKES SENSE.