VOTE: Should a child born on US soil automatically be a US citizen?

[Frankeneinstein]

The Supreme COurt said otherwise in Wong v. US, and they are about to say it again for the hard of hearing.

isn't that the objective of todays courts? to usurp the will of the people...where's JoeBob?

 

[egp320i]

But the 14th doesn't say that. does it?

because it was wrote in 1866..........and you are a specialist?

this is NOT 1866, immigration has changed

You seem stuck in the past

give illegals a free pass because they use a loophole that should have been CLOSED

not a hard concept

 

[egp320i]

What you seem to have missed is it's no different smuggling negros into the US illegally, than it is smuggling mexicans into the US illegally.

People have been illegally smuggling humans into the US for hundreds of years.
And whether 1866 or 1966, the children of those illegals born in the US, became citizens by the 14th amendment.

not in 1866 bud.......negro's were allowed and welcome then, they were bought like a used car

flash to 2026, no we have not been smuggling for a 100 years when it's legal

hiring somebody to get you into the USA when you are pregnant IS illegal

apples to ******* grapefruit here, like 160 YEARS

 

[egp320i]

The Supreme COurt said otherwise in Wong v. US, and they are about to say it again for the hard of hearing.

Eong was NOT illegal and neither were his parent, thus he is a US citizen

He was not smuggled in

His parents were actually legal too.......

WTF does that have to do with somebody from SA hiring somebody to get them into the USA to drop a child, you know one our taxpayer will pay and then say........I beat your system, my kid is legal thus so am I, you can't deport me

that is using a loophole and gaming the system........it's also lazy ******* cheating

Don't have the time to wait in line, you want first?

Try that shit at space mountain if you think you are so special Joe

1890's there were NOT visas, if you could get here you were a citizen

2026, we have laws now against that........times change

Chinese exclusion act of 1882 banned those from China
He was already here......but was denied bring a citizen

he challenged and won........that was 1882, this not 1882, we don't have any exclusion act anymore

old laws, new era and they don't fit the script of today........that is the core issue

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

because it was wrote in 1866..........and you are a specialist?

this is NOT 1866, immigration has changed

You seem stuck in the past

give illegals a free pass because they use a loophole that should have been CLOSED

not a hard concept

Close the loophole. If you don't, it's still there

 

[JoeB131]

because it was wrote in 1866..........and you are a specialist?

this is NOT 1866, immigration has changed

You seem stuck in the past

give illegals a free pass because they use a loophole that should have been CLOSED

not a hard concept

Except it wasn't a loophole.

Nobody is illegal on stolen land.

 

[JoeB131]

Eong was NOT illegal and neither were his parent, thus he is a US citizen

He was not smuggled in

His parents were actually legal too.......

WTF does that have to do with somebody from SA hiring somebody to get them into the USA to drop a child, you know one our taxpayer will pay and then say........I beat your system, my kid is legal thus so am I, you can't deport me

that is using a loophole and gaming the system........it's also lazy ******* cheating

Don't have the time to wait in line, you want first?

Try that shit at space mountain if you think you are so special Joe

1890's there were NOT visas, if you could get here you were a citizen

2026, we have laws now against that........times change

Chinese exclusion act of 1882 banned those from China
He was already here......but was denied bring a citizen

he challenged and won........that was 1882, this not 1882, we don't have any exclusion act anymore

old laws, new era and they don't fit the script of today........that is the core issue

Try giving birth at Space Mountain? I think Disney would consider that a pretty big deal.


Actually, you are making the point.

The Chinese Exclusion Act was passed because Americans decided that the Chinese were an undesirable class of people. But none of that matter in the case of Wong, he was born here. His parents, on the other hand, had left for China and could NOT get back in under the CEA. (Wong himself had left for China, tried to get back in, and they tried to exclude him despite him being a citizen.)

So if anything, when you've made a distinction between "legal" and "illegal" immigrants, it doesn't matter if the child is born here.

The 14th Amendment is very clear on that. Anyone born here is a citizen unless they are a diplomat or a member of a foreign army.

 

[egp320i]

Try giving birth at Space Mountain? I think Disney would consider that a pretty big deal.


Actually, you are making the point.

The Chinese Exclusion Act was passed because Americans decided that the Chinese were an undesirable class of people. But none of that matter in the case of Wong, he was born here. His parents, on the other hand, had left for China and could NOT get back in under the CEA. (Wong himself had left for China, tried to get back in, and they tried to exclude him despite him being a citizen.)

So if anything, when you've made a distinction between "legal" and "illegal" immigrants, it doesn't matter if the child is born here.

The 14th Amendment is very clear on that. Anyone born here is a citizen unless they are a diplomat or a member of a foreign army.

nope, the 14th is vague and written in 1866 when there were NO borders, NO vista like today

it's outdated for the times, we don't have black slaves or chinese workers imported to work on our railroads

but democrats use that loophole to insure illegals get in, are citizens, get benefits and vote D

the only reason they have any seats, stack the system, f*ck the system

 

[egp320i]

Except it wasn't a loophole.

Nobody is illegal on stolen land.

who stole it? did the apache have a deed to their land that would hold up in court?.........

wow if this is your angle it's pathetic

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

nope, the 14th is vague and written in 1866 when there were NO borders, NO vistas like today

it's outdated for the times, we don't have black slaves or chinese workers imported to work on our railroads

but democrats use that loophole to insure illegals get in, are citizens, get benefits and vote D

the only reason they have any seats, stack the system, f*ck the system

Vistas?

 

[egp320i]

Vistas?

haha, visa's..........time to fix, glad you broke a rib on a one word typo, wow, English patrol in full effect here
I think the UK is calling you, they need people like to enforce everything including wiping your ass wrong

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

haha, visa's..........time to fix, glad you broke a rib on a one word typo, wow, English patrol in full effect here
I think the UK is calling you, they need people like to enforce everything including wiping your ass wrong

Wow! I think a struck a nerve! Why haven't you answered my previous post? Do you intentionally derail the thread, so you won't look ignorant?

 

[JoeB131]

nope, the 14th is vague and written in 1866 when there were NO borders, NO vista like today

it's outdated for the times, we don't have black slaves or chinese workers imported to work on our railroads

but democrats use that loophole to insure illegals get in, are citizens, get benefits and vote D

the only reason they have any seats, stack the system, f*ck the system

We had borders in 1866. In fact, the borders were very clearly defined with the treaties we signed under President Polk.

The borders of the continental US haven't changed since 1853 with the Gadsden Purchase.

 

[meaner gene]

because it was wrote in 1866..........and you are a specialist?

this is NOT 1866, immigration has changed

You seem stuck in the past

give illegals a free pass because they use a loophole that should have been CLOSED

not a hard concept

Re: immigration has changed

But when it comes to the 2nd amendment, republicans take the opposite view.

Weapons have certainly changed. Going from a musket that could fire 2-4 rounds per minute to a modern firearm that can fire 3-6 rounds per SECOND.

Yet the supreme court didn't even look at the change when they reached back to the 1790's to decide Heller v DC.

In the 1700's the population in the US DOUBLED every 25 years, post-1790 growth exceeding 3% annually,
That's more than 10 times what people are complaining about today.

 

[meaner gene]

nope, the 14th is vague and written in 1866 when there were NO borders, NO vista like today

it's outdated for the times, we don't have black slaves or chinese workers imported to work on our railroads

but democrats use that loophole to insure illegals get in, are citizens, get benefits and vote D

the only reason they have any seats, stack the system, f*ck the system

Re: it's outdated for the times, we don't have black slaves or chinese workers imported to work on our railroads

What you miss is that the 14th was written as the answer to a 400 year history of bringing slaves to the US, both legally and illegally. The 14th didn't make a distinction between those slaves brought here legally, from those slaves brought here illegally.
Which means the 14th applied to both those legally and illegally in the US.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Yes, but only if the parents were forced into the country as slaves.

 

[meaner gene]

Yes, but only if the parents were forced into the country as slaves.

It even applies to parents who were illegally in the country.

 

[egp320i]

Re: it's outdated for the times, we don't have black slaves or chinese workers imported to work on our railroads

What you miss is that the 14th was written as the answer to a 400 year history of bringing slaves to the US, both legally and illegally. The 14th didn't make a distinction between those slaves brought here legally, from those slaves brought here illegally.
Which means the 14th applied to both those legally and illegally in the US.

The "Dred Scott" Reversal​

Before the 14th Amendment, the Supreme Court (in the infamous Dred Scott case) basically said that Black people—enslaved or free—could never be citizens.

• The Southern Play: After the war, Southern states tried to keep this alive by passing "Black Codes." They wanted a world where formerly enslaved people were "free" from chains but had zero legal rights, zero protection, and no standing in court.
  
  
  
  
• The 14th Amendment Fix: Section 1 established Birthright Citizenship. It said: "If you are born here, you are a citizen of the U.S. and the state where you live, and no state can take that away." It made citizenship a federal shield that a state couldn't pierce.
  
  

2. The "Ankle-Holding" of the 1860s​

The South didn't just "not want" to give citizenship; they fought it tooth and nail because citizenship meant Representation.

• The 3/5ths Problem: Once slavery was abolished (13th Amendment), the "3/5ths Compromise" died. Suddenly, the South’s population "increased" for the purpose of counting seats in Congress, even though they weren't letting those people vote.
• The Federal Response: The 14th Amendment basically told the South: "If you don't let these new citizens vote, we are going to kick your representatives out of D.C. and shrink your power in Congress."

It was passed a year after the 13th because the southern stated did want them to be citizens

that is the #1 reason, not border crosses and anchor babies, that did not exist

so no it was not about 400 years of slaves, it was what to do with them once they were freed

 

[meaner gene]

The "Dred Scott" Reversal​

Before the 14th Amendment, the Supreme Court (in the infamous Dred Scott case) basically said that Black people—enslaved or free—could never be citizens.

• The Southern Play: After the war, Southern states tried to keep this alive by passing "Black Codes." They wanted a world where formerly enslaved people were "free" from chains but had zero legal rights, zero protection, and no standing in court.
  
  
  
  
• The 14th Amendment Fix: Section 1 established Birthright Citizenship. It said: "If you are born here, you are a citizen of the U.S. and the state where you live, and no state can take that away." It made citizenship a federal shield that a state couldn't pierce.
  
  
  

2. The "Ankle-Holding" of the 1860s​

The South didn't just "not want" to give citizenship; they fought it tooth and nail because citizenship meant Representation.

• The 3/5ths Problem: Once slavery was abolished (13th Amendment), the "3/5ths Compromise" died. Suddenly, the South’s population "increased" for the purpose of counting seats in Congress, even though they weren't letting those people vote.
• The Federal Response: The 14th Amendment basically told the South: "If you don't let these new citizens vote, we are going to kick your representatives out of D.C. and shrink your power in Congress."

It was passed a year after the 13th because the southern stated did want them to be citizens

that is the #1 reason, not border crosses and anchor babies, that did not exist

That explains the WHY.

What you miss is that the HOW, extends that right to everyone born in the US, and not just the offspring of slaves/former slaves.

The argument that it should only apply to parents "legally" within the country has no merit, because the 14th applied to parents (slaves) who were not "legally" within the country.

 

[egp320i]

That explains the WHY.

What you miss is that the HOW, extends that right to everyone born in the US, and not just the offspring of slaves/former slaves.

The argument that it should only apply to parents "legally" within the country has no merit, because the 14th applied to parents (slaves) who were not "legally" within the country.

true but at the time we did not have people crossing the border either

the 14th addressed the issue of that day, they were not thinking ahead 100+ years ago

The wording was very wide open, not if you are a legal citizen but anybody

We have a border, we have ICE now

1866 we did not, the USA was not thinking about the Mexican border at all