Trump Declares He Will End Birthright Citizenship

Politics
925

You are not paying attention to what has already been posted. Your opinion has already been debunked

IN THIS POST

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

:roll_eyes:

JWK

926

I wasn’t asking Justice Gray, I was asking you. Why do you think it’s impossible to answer the question? It seems like you have all the answers but cannot answer this simple question?

As you’ve defined alligence earlier in this thread, then Wong Kim Ark’s parents would have foreign alligence but you seem to refuse to admit it.

1 Like
927

Spare me your BS wall of text. Your arguments are inane and ignore the words of those who wrote and passed the CRA of 1866 and the 14th. There were only three exceptions to being subject to our jurisdiction:

Foreign diplomats
Indians on Indian lands
Occupying soldiers

Every other person. Every. Other. Person. Is subject to our jurisdiction when they are on our soil. Complete jurisdiction. They are subject to every. One. Of. Our. Laws.

Their children born here are US citizens.

1 Like
928

Oh where, oh where
Has my little EO gone?
Oh where, oh where can it be?
With its hopes cut short
And its odds so long
Oh where, oh where can it be?

929

You mean it could have all been a political ploy by the President to gin up support from the hard line immigration crowd and never really intended to be implemented?

That the whole thing was a cynical way to inject even more fear and division into the country in order to win an election?

Say it isn’t so?

930

It really says a lot about how little the right believes in their policy positions, considering how they’ve resorted to fear-mongering as their only position. Whipping the base into a fear-induced frenzy was what they felt was their only chance at retaining power. It’s sad really when you think of it.

931

You are not paying attention to what has already been posted. Your opinion has already been debunked

IN THIS POST

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

:roll_eyes:

JWK

Thank you for your opinion but the “wall of text” and the documentation contained therein, which you detest, debunks your wrongheaded opinion.

:roll_eyes:

JWK

American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance the economic needs of millions of poverty stricken, poorly educated, low and unskilled aliens who have invaded America’s borders.

3 Likes
932

Slaughterhouse was overturned by Wong Kim Ark.

Did Wong Kim Ark’s parents have any foreign alligence?

933

Where is the Executive Order? How hard can it be to write? Is it hiding behind the caravan?

934

Was thinking about this executive order again… Just for fun, let’s say he issues the executive order and it’s allowed to stand… Birthright citizenship is no more… How do I prove I am a citizen?

1 Like
935

Another one of fat donald’s promise down the drain.

1 Like
936

I like that it fueled the Blue Wave.

937

Holly crap! How to you come up with such nonsense?

Wong Kim Ark had nothing to do with the Slaughterhouse Cases decision regarding the Constitution’s Privileges or Immunities Clause, and it [the Slaughterhouse Cases] is still binding law today.

:roll_eyes:

JWK

938

You’re right. Slaughterhouse had nothing to do with the idea of citizenship at birth which is why it’s so silly for you to keep bringing it up.

Overturned is the wrong word. For some reason, Slaughterhouse brought up the idea of jurisdiction even though it was unrelated to the case. Justice Gray roundly rebuked the opinion expressed in that case and did not use it as precedent.

I know you’re likely to crop this out but I’ll keep asking until I get an answer. Did Wong Kim Ark’s parents have any foreign alligance?

939

Settled law. A foreign concept to you, John.

But I still hold out hope for you. Optimist that I am.

Allan

940

:roll_eyes:

You forgot to provide the case in which our Supreme Court ruled that a child born on American soil to an illegal entrant becomes a citizen upon birth.

JWK

941

Just for fun, let’s say he issues the executive order and it’s allowed to stand… Birthright citizenship is no more… How do I prove I am a citizen?

942

File a lawsuit, John and get it laughed out of court.

It’s settled law, you just don’t want to admit it to yourself.

Allan

943

You would have to prove who your parents are.

Allan

944

Prove what about my parents?