Trump will announce end of birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants, officials say

[luiza]

Deliberately deflecting/ cloaking the reason for it being needed .

With the need for that to be finally confirmed by the Courts fully appreciated by all parties .

 

[Mac-7]

Deliberately deflecting/ cloaking the reason for it being needed .

With the need for that to be finally confirmed by the Courts fully appreciated by all parties .

It could be confirmed by the SC

And probably will be confirmed in the 9th Circuit or some other far lib lower jurisdiction to begin with

 

[Curried Goats]

.
Let us stick to documented facts.


FACT: According to those who framed our Constitution and helped to ratify it, the wording in the Fourteenth Amendment “… and subject to the jurisdiction thereof …” is a qualifier which, by documented legislative intent, excludes from the privilege of United States citizenship the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born on American soil. SOURCE

FACT: Congress has not exercised its Fourteenth Amendment, Section 5, authority to adopt appropriate legislation granting citizenship to the offspring of illegal entrant foreign nationals born on American soil.

FACT: “Without the enforcement clause, the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment would be moot. This clause gives Congress the power to pass legislation with the goal of enforcing the Amendment. As a result, Congress has used this clause to ensure all Americans enjoy the rights outlined in the Fourteenth Amendment.” SOURCE

FACT: In 1924, Congress exercised its authority and adopted appropriate legislation involving Indians, who were then subject to a foreign power, extending United States birth right citizenship by the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924


FACT: To date there is no Supreme Court case which took up the question and confirmed a child born on American soil to an illegal entrant foreign national is granted U.S. citizenship upon birth.

FACT: Considering there is no federal statute, nor a Supreme Court case confirming a child born on American soil to an illegal entrant foreign national is a U.S. citizenship upon birth, it is mere current unwritten policy which does so.

FACT: The good news is, Trump can change current federal unwritten policy with a stroke of his pen.

That's not a fact you moron. It's hard for the original intent to mean anything whatsoever about illegal entrants since there really was no such thing at the time of ratification. This was a growing country that wanted immigrants. It reserved citizenship for whites who had been in the country for a certain number of years like under the Naturalization Act of 1790 but that ended with the ratification of the 14th.

 

[skews13]

It will certainly by challenged in the courts and probably be delayed for years

But it puts the ball in the globalist court and is desperately needed

So way to go Trump

Loser in court.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

It won't survive the Courts.

 

[SweetTea]

... and unfortunately, on that point he will lose and be forced to seek a constitutional amendment.

I want to know how he thinks this can be enforced. I am extremely curious.

Once again you seem to be for an obviously bad and misused policy. Do you think the 14th Amendment should be removed? The amendment aside, do you believe a person should be able to sneak Into our country and have a baby that is a citizen that can be immediately eligible, along with the mother, for benefits? Do you really believe that was the intent of the 14th and do really believe that makes any sense today?

 

[SweetSue92]

It won't survive the Courts.

No indeed but it moves the ball forward. It makes sane Americans wonder why we are the only nation in the world that lets illegals sneak in to have babies and then get all the benefits of parenting a "citizen".

 

[ThisIsMe]

It will certainly by challenged in the courts and probably be delayed for years

But it puts the ball in the globalist court and is desperately needed

So way to go Trump

I think the text of "subject to the jurisdiction of" needs to be defined once and for all. Surely the founders didn't mean that foreigners could come to the US and have a baby and the baby would be a citizen while the foreigner would not, thus creating the conundrum where the parents had to be granted rights to stay illegally or the citizen baby had to leave with the parents.

I'm not sure they meant for that to happen.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It could be confirmed by the SC

And probably will be confirmed in the 9th Circuit or some other far lib lower jurisdiction to begin with

Can’t totally count on Roberts or Amy or Kavanaugh.

 

[SweetTea]

I just can’t understand why any American would oppose this? The 14th Amendment is being abused, but for some unknown reason, Democrats want this abuse to continue. Thorough indoctrination is the only explanation.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

I think the text of "subject to the jurisdiction of" needs to be defined once and for all. Surely the founders didn't mean that foreigners could come to the US and have a baby and the baby would be a citizen while the foreigner would not, thus creating the conundrum where the parents had to be granted rights to stay illegally or the citizen baby had to leave with the parents.

I'm not sure they meant for that to happen.

It's what it leads to, though. The writers of the 14th did not think it through, but it is the law and no EO can change that.

You need an Amendment.

You won't get it.

 

[SweetTea]

Can’t totally count on Roberts or Amy or Kavanaugh.

Robert’s for sure. He seems to be all to willing to side with Democrats on high profile issues. It almost makes you wonder if he is getting his pockets greased on occasion.

 

[SweetTea]

It's what it leads to, though. The writers of the 14th did not think it through, but it is the law and no EO can change that.

You need an Amendment.

You won't get it.

Regardless, Democrats seem to like the current interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Why is that?

 

[ThisIsMe]

It's what it leads to, though. The writers of the 14th did not think it through, but it is the law and no EO can change that.

You need an Amendment.

You won't get it.

But maybe they DID think it through, when they put in "subject to the jurisdiction of". That would be the clarification point. Meaning, a baby born to foreigner parents would not be subject to the jurisdiction of the US, but of the country to which their parents belonged to.

if a foreign diplomat was not subject to the jurisdiction of the US, then why would a person here illegally? Either you are saying that a diplomat is not subject to our laws, meaning they could break them with impunity, or, "subject to the laws" was not what they meant.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Loser in court.

Really, for what reason did you appear skrewey??

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

But maybe they DID think it through, when they put in "subject to the jurisdiction of". That would be the clarification point. Meaning, a baby born to foreigner parents would not be subject to the jurisdiction of the US, but of the country to which their parents belonged to.

if a foreign diplomat was not subject to the jurisdiction of the US, then why would a person here illegally? Either you are saying that a diplomat is not subject to our laws, meaning they could break them with impunity, or, "subject to the laws" was not what they meant.

Maybe so, but legislation cannot cure it and neither can an EO.

 

[Mac-7]

Can’t totally count on Roberts or Amy or Kavanaugh.

Agreed

 

[wamose]

This should have been brought up decades ago, but Democrats and neocons don't give a **** about what's good for Americans. VIVA MAGA.

 

[kyzr]

No indeed but it moves the ball forward. It makes sane Americans wonder why we are the only nation in the world that lets illegals sneak in to have babies and then get all the benefits of parenting a "citizen".

Making Americans is a "cottage industry" in Russia and China. It needs to stop.

 

[Moonglow]

It will certainly by challenged in the courts and probably be delayed for years

But it puts the ball in the globalist court and is desperately needed

So way to go Trump

So much for the Constitution and Trump.