.
See: Supreme Court agrees to hear challenge to Trump’s birthright citizenship order.
“In an order released Friday afternoon, the justices said they would take up for review Trump v. Barbara, a case originally brought in a federal court in New Hampshire by a group of people whose children could be affected by the order. The Justice Department filed petitions to the high court to hear the Barbara case and Trump v. Washington, a challenge brought by Democrat-led states, in September, arguing the justices should rule on the legality of the order.”
Well, since our Supreme Court has apparently decided to take up the meaning of Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, as it relates to bestowing United States citizenship, let us all keep in mind the rules for doing so, as stated by our very own Supreme Court:
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)
This very procedure was also summarized in a United States Senate Report as follows:
“In construing the Constitution we are compelled to give it such interpretation as will secure the result intended to be accomplished by those who framed it and the people who adopted it…A construction which would give the phrase…a meaning differing from the sense in which it was understood and employed by the people when they adopted the Constitution, would be as unconstitutional as a departure from the plain and express language of the Constitution.” __ Senate Report No. 21, 42nd Cong. 2d Session 2 (1872), reprinted in Alfred Avins, The Reconstruction Amendments’ Debates 571 (1967),
Finally, let me personally point out a self-evident truth: Those who reject abiding by the text of our Constitution, and the intentions and beliefs under which it was agree to, as documented from historical records ___ its framing and ratification debates which give context to its text ___ wish to remove the anchor and rudder of our constitutional system so they may then be free to apply the Humpty Dumpty theory of language to our Constitution:
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master-that’s all.”
Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment states:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
So, exactly what did the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment, and those who ratified it, mean by its carefully stated wording, “. . . and subject to the jurisdiction thereof . . .”? An excellent source, with a wealth of documentation on this very subject is SUBJECT TO THE [COMPLETE] JURISDICTION THEREOF: SALVAGING THE ORIGINAL MEANING OF THE CITIZENSHIP CLAUSE Texas Review of Law & Politics, by AMY SWEARER
JWK
“The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void.” ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law , 1858.
