Trump Declares He Will End Birthright Citizenship

[TheDoctorIsIn]

An executive order is a directive to the executive branch.

How do you think Trump will accomplish ending birthright citizenship through the executive branch? What will the EO say?

[zantax]

@TheDoctorIsIn

An executive order is a directive to the executive branch.

How do you think Trump will accomplish ending birthright citizenship through the executive branch? What will the EO say?

I imagine it would direct executive agencies not to recognize citizenship allegedly acquired through birth on US soil to illegal aliens.

[zantax]

And yes, odds are it never even gets issued. And was instead an effective political ploy.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

How would that be accomplished? How would executive agencies know whether someone “acquired” their citizenship by birth?

As of this moment, according to the US Code, a certificate of birth is proof of citizenship. Trump can’t unilaterally change statutory language, nor can he order states to not give birth certificates to children of illegal immigrants.

[zantax]

@TheDoctorIsIn

How would that be accomplished? How would executive agencies know whether someone “acquired” their citizenship by birth?

As of this moment, according to the US Code, a certificate of birth is proof of citizenship. Trump can’t unilaterally change statutory language, nor can he order states to not give birth certificates to children of illegal immigrants.

There are any number of federal programs that require you be a citizen to qualify.

[Bill.in.PA]

No, Wong’s parents were legal residents when he was born, but they were denied re-entry to the US after they went back to China since they were not US citizens.

The court ruled Wong was a US citizen from birth, but there is no ruling on children whose parents are here in violation of US law.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@zantax

There are any number of federal programs that require you be a citizen to qualify.

Of course. And according to the statutes that govern those programs, a birth certificate issued by a state is proof of citizenship.

Will Trump direct executive agencies to no longer accept birth certificates as proof of citizenship? It’s unlikely that he could - but do you think that’s the solution?

[Cynic]

The 14th amendment is constitutional law, quote me where I said anything about “statutory law”, what a pathetic attempt at deflection.

Cynic

[dantes]

When the amendment was written, it applied to every immigrant. There wasn’t even a concept of an illegal alien at that time.

[zantax]

@dantes

When the amendment was written, it applied to every immigrant. There wasn’t even a concept of an illegal alien at that time.

Know what else wasn’t a concept at the time? Dual citizenship. Think about it for a minute.

[dantes]

Is that true? I have my doubts. Can you substantiate this claim?

[johnwk2]

@"johnwk2

@"TheDoctorIsIn

@"zantax

And those people were named in the Amendment, making the addition of the phrase subject to the jurisdiction thereof superflous if they were the only ones that fell under that category. Now what has the court said about that in regard to valid constitutional construction? I am sure JownWK would be glad to fill you in.

Are you reading a different 14th Amendment than the rest of us?

It doesn’t “name those people”.

You really shouldn’t use JohnWK as your appeal to authority here. He’s completely lost.

My authority are the very intentions expressed by those who were in attendance of the 39th Congress. And, the fact is, TRUMBULL, who was in attendance during the framing of the 14th Amendment said:**

“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“.

Now, if you have some relevant documentation to shed light on the meaning of “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”, which happens to be a qualifier for citizenship being bestowed upon children born on United States Soil, please feel free to post that documentation, rather than personal opinions and insults.

JWK

@"dantes

What does it mean to owe allegiance to a country?

For foreign nationals it means taking 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."

Having taken the above oath, a foreign national becomes subject to the jurisdiction of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment.

JWK

American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance a maternity ward for the poverty stricken populations of other countries who invade America’s borders to give birth.

[dantes]

Interestingly nothing in that oath says anything about declaring allegiance to the United States.

Oops. Missed that didn’t you. Your claim doesn’t stand up to the strict language of the oath and is therefore invalid.

I’ll ask again, what defines allegiance to a country? Hopefully you come up with a better answer this time.

[zantax]

@johnwk2

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;

Lol of course it does.

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;

[dantes]

My bad. It’s too early.

[dantes]

Raises the question though, I never took any oath. Do I have allegiance to this country?

[zantax]

@dantes

Raises the question though, I never took any oath. Do I have allegiance to this country?

I don’t know, do you?

[dantes]

I guess not. Makes me wonder how that affects whether I’m subject to the jurisdiction of the country as we would be forced to believe by John’s claim.

[zantax]

@dantes

I guess not. Makes me wonder how that affects whether I’m subject to the jurisdiction of the country as we would be forced to believe by John’s claim.

Constitutionally it is assumed if you were born here to American parents that you do. Which of course is no guarantee that you do.

[dantes]

Where does the constitution say that?