Some fatal consequences of illegal and mass immigration

Currently, not only is today’s unchecked border and immigration policies helping to spread COVID-19 throughout the United States, wherever border crossers are being transported to by the Biden Administration, but American citizens are also suffering numerous other consequences directly related to a reckless handling of our border and immigration.

For example, American citizens are being taxed to pay for the birth of anchor babies born to illegal aliens which opens the door for more taxpayer benefits handed over to illegal entrants, see: Illegal Immigrant Births - At Your Expense

.

*"It was 5 a.m. and CBS News national correspondent Byron Pitts is with a woman who is nine months pregnant. She’s rushed to a south Texas hospital to undergo a C-section - a $4,700 medical procedure that won’t cost her a dime. * She qualifies for emergency Medicaid."

And there are other devastating effects from a reckless immigration policy: many of our schools are overburden with the children of foreign aliens which detracts from our own children’s education; MS-13 gang members are causing havoc in a number of our nation’s inner cities; our jail and prison population is exploding with illegal aliens and the costs of housing them are overwhelming the system; and then there is the healthcare costs of millions of illegal entrants already in our country which American citizens pay .

The question is, why on earth would any patriotic American citizen, and especially those at the helm of government, aid and abet in this suicidal path America is now on?

JWK

Pay for the birth of US Citizens.

Don’t like it… change the Constitution.

1 Like

There is no need to change the Constitution if the documented intended meaning of “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is adhered to.[1]

The simple truth is, and one you seem to ignore, our Supreme Court has never, in its entire history, decided a case questioning whether or not a child born to an illegal entrant, while on American soil, is granted citizenship by the terms of the 1st Section of the 14th Amendment.

One of the few times the Court did approached answering this question was in the Slaughterhouse Cases 83 U.S. 36, 73 (1873) . The Court wrote “[t]he phrase, ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of … citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States .”

A couple years later, in in Minor v. Happersett 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875) , all the Court’s members expressed “doubts” that citizenship was granted, by the terms of our constitution, to “children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents,” and the Court did so after expressly pointing out that citizenship attaches only when the immigrant owes “allegiance” to this country.

That is one reason why I keep pointing out how an immigrant officially and legally declares “allegiance” to our country. They do it by taking our country’s Oath of Allegiance:

See our Naturalization Oath of Allegiance to the United States of America

“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 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.”

[i] In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by writing:
“Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.”

JWK

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)

Yeah.

The courts have determined your interpret to be wrong.

.
image

.

Please quote my “interpretation” you are referring to.

Please cite the S.C. written opinion you are referring to, and the quote from the opinion confirming your assertion to be accurate.

JWK

Our federal government is commanded “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.

They hate and despise most Americans and are getting paid well to destroy their nation from within, would be a reason.

And the Democrat Party Leadership seem to be accomplishing their goal.

Jezcoe,

I’m still waiting for you to respond to MY ANSWER to your post.

JWK

See Texas police learn COVID-positive illegal immigrants sent to local hotels, after Whataburger encounter
July 28th, 2021

”Authorities in South Texas said Tuesday they’ve learned that illegal immigrants who have possibly tested positive for COVID-19 were being released from federal custody to a Catholic charity, which booked hotel rooms for them without notifying local officials.”

”The La Joya Police Department said a patrol officer was waved down Monday by someone concerned about a group that appeared to be sick at a Whataburger fast food restaurant.”

The article continues by pointing out when an “officer approached the migrants, they said they had tested positive for the coronavirus and had been apprehended by Border Patrol agents several days prior before being released.”

JWK

Or vote for a president who enforces our immigration laws.

U.S. vs. Wong Kim Ark.

Now I know you think this is bad law, and maybe you are right, but as of this writing there hasn’t been a judicial or legislative fix. It looks like @Jezcoe is right.

If immigration laws were rigorously enforced, birthright citizenship would be a minor issue, for it would not be common.

2 Likes

Yeah probably, but I am trying to engage @johnwk2 's request for the S.C. case where the 14th allows for “anchor babies”.

If you have thoughts on that, I’d be interested to read them.

And not one who gives aid and comfort to those invading our border!

JWK
Our President by the terms of our Constitution, is commanded “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.

I see you answered one of the questions I asked, but avoided the other.

The assertion posted to me was: “The courts have determined your interpret to be wrong.”

My response was: Please cite the S.C. written opinion you are referring to, and the quote from the opinion confirming your assertion to be accurate.

So, what is the quote from U.S. vs. Wong Kim Ark.confirming the assertion Jezcoe, made?

Keep in mind, my assertion was:

Our Supreme Court has never, in its entire history, decided a case questioning whether or not a child born to an illegal entrant, while on American soil, is granted citizenship by the terms of the 1st Section of the 14th Amendment.

JWK


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)

Ah. In that, you are correct. The Supremes haven’t taken up the direct question: “are children of illegals born in the U.S. automatically citizens”?

Since it was decided, courts have deferred to Kim Wong Ark (rightly or wrongly), and ruled birthright citizenship does apply.

You say “courts have deferred to Kim Wong Ark and ruled birthright citizenship does apply.”.

I am still waiting for a quote from the Kim Wong Ark opinion in which the court ruled that a child born to an illegal entrant while in the United States, becomes a citizen upon birth.

And now, I would also like a list of the subsequent cases you assert have deferred to and cited “Kim Wong Ark”, as case law, to rule a child born to an illegal entrant while in the United States becomes a citizen of the United States upon birth.

JWK

Fifth column!

1 Like

1-I already admitted that I was wrong, the decision in Kim does not talk about the children of illegals.
2-in my research, I found that cases were turned back in deference to Kim. These were at the appellate level, and I don’t have the resources to tell you what these cases are. However, even a wiki search shows deference to Kim.
3-I will advise you to look around, and trust your lyin’ eyes, because currently, children of illegals are considered citizens

I know that you disagree with this, but it does appear to be the 'law of the land.

Do with that what you will.

Finally: I assume that you are not a textualist. Do you agree? If so, would you mind giving a brief explanation of why not?

So, my original statement that, Our Supreme Court has never, in its entire history, decided a case questioning whether or not a child born to an illegal entrant, while on American soil, is granted citizenship by the terms of the 1st Section of the 14th Amendment., turns out to be true.

JWK