Well, according to one regular here, Valerie Jarrett has allegiance to Iran based on being born there (to American parents), and living there until the ripe old age of 5.
So yeah, he might be serious.
The Deep State has been playing a Very Long Game in Its Quest To Destroy America And Subjugate It To The Globalists.
Right, but they also did not want to create a backdoor to circumvent our immigration laws.
They never envisioned the travel agent anchor baby airline vacation packages of today. where pregnant foreigners come to the US, have an anchor baby, go back to their mother Russian and raise the kid as a Russian for 21 years. Then the anchor brings three generations of Russians to the US.
Regardless of how you or I choose to interpret what their original intent was back in the 1860s, we need to amend our Constitution to fix the current undermining of our immigration system.
1 Like
If there is an overt act to undermining of our 2nd amendment right, please spell it out. Otherwise, I don’t see how fixing immigration is going to open up the entire US Constitution to being amended
Good attempt by the President, but if immigration laws were fully enforced then there would be little need to end birthright citizenship. If a minimal number of illegals were in the country, the impact of birthright citizenship would be minimal.
In the meantime, end DACA. That misguided act is one of the reasons we have groups of illegals heading for our borders right not.
1 Like
.Thank you for your unsubstantiated opinion. The fact is, TRUMBULL, who was in attendance during the framing of the 14th Amendment would disagree with you. He states:
“The provision is, that “all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” That means “subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.” . . . “What do we mean by “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States?” Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.” __ see SEE: page 2893, Congressional Globe, 39th Congress (1866) 1st column halfway down.
And then there is John A. Bingham, chief architect of the 14th Amendment’s first section who considered the proposed national law on citizenship as “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…” Cong. Globe, page 1291(March 9, 1866) middle column half way down.
And less than five years after the 14th Amendment is adopted, the Supreme Court, In IN RE SLAUGHTER-HOUSE CASES, 83 U.S. 36 (1872) confirms the legislative intent of the amendment as follows:
“That its main purpose was to establish the citizenship of the negro can admit of no doubt. The phrase, subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States“.
And then, twelve years later, in 1884, JUSTICE GRAY delivered the opinion of the Court in Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884) in which he emphasizes:
Now, I take it that the children of aliens, whose parents have not only not renounced their allegiance to their native country . . . must necessarily remain themselves subject to the same sovereignty as their parents, and cannot, in the nature of things, be, any more than their parents, completely subject to the jurisdiction of such other country
'This section contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two sources only,-birth and naturalization. The persons declared to be citizens are ‘all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’ The evident meaning of these last words is, not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiance
JWK
I already dismantled your arguments. Trumbull was quite explicitly in favor of children born in the US to UNNATURALIZED immigrant parents receiving citizenship.
QED.
4 Likes
It would be smarter to pass a constitutional amendment restricting any New York City con man from being President again.
3 Likes
Welp, trumpists ■■■■ on the deficit now they’re ■■■■■■■■ on the constitution. I guess the only people trumpists care positively about are rich people. No principles.
I heard some interesting numbers today.
300,000 baby citizens born to illegal parents each year.
7.5% of baby citizens in county hospitals.
That’s a lot of anchor babies.
More people to buy stuff and raises the GDP.
Good deal all around.
Allan
You mean a lot of Americans 
Please stop stalking me.
You want to address your leader’s comments?
So have we reached consensus that the Constitution is a living document and subject to historical context?
He said amend.
What’s the difference between amend and change in this context?
Priceless!
Thank goodness the Founders gave us the option to change/amend their constitution. Think how screwed up things would be now if it had been carved in stone.
Very forward thinking.
This is an argument worth considering, however novel and radical - that our Founding Fathers, brilliant though they may have been, were not soothsayers able to predict what life in America would be like centuries after their deaths. Had they known, for instance, that an Amendment might one day be the cause of untold misery for American citizens because of present day conditions, then perhaps they might have considered the Constitution a living document and flexible to the needs of the citizenry in their specific time and place, and any talk of it being sacrosanct and rigid in its reading essentially rendered it incapable of adequately serving the people it was intended to safeguard.
That’s some crazy ■■■■ right there!
3 Likes
