Fourteenth Amendment “birthright citizenship” is what was intended by those writing the 14th Amendment.
Most of those who wrap themselves in the Constitution prove how much they really despise it.
When the 14th Amendment was passed, the inspiration was the newly-freed slaves.
This was the motivation, not the limitation.
The leaders writing this Amendment were not stupid. They wrote what they wrote. It is what it is.
They were in an expansive mood and they wrote the wording very broadly. The debates at the time show that the issue of foreigners giving birth in the United States was discussed and, like many other countries (including Canada and Mexico and more than 30 others), those who enacted the Amendment intended for them to be covered.
The only exceptions were those not under the “jurisdiction” of the United States. This included only indigenous Americans (whose reservations, at that time, were considered separate and sovereign nations prior to enacting the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934) or foreign diplomats, whose diplomatic immunity made them outside the “jurisdiction” of the United States (so they cannot be sued in civil court or charged in criminal court).
In contrast, anyone else in the United States, even if illegally, is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. They can be arrested, tried for crimes, or sued civilly.
When the Supreme Court decided 14th Amendment rights cases in Elk v. Wilkins (1884) and United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), rights were defined broadly and the judges referenced the Congressional debates that showed the intent of those who passed these Amendments.
And no, a president cannot repeal a Constitutional Amendment with an executive order (and seriously, Trump [without factual basis] whined about Obama abusing executive orders?)
Awwwwwwwmake a really great deal this time……swap Trump for some good looking Senor! Pay him (Trump) in Mexican dollars and promise him a huge raise (also in Mexican dollars). Hand him a madeinmexico towel if he cries too hard.
It might also apply to Donald’s father. His father was going back and forth to Germany at the time his father was an embryo. Possibilities are that he was registered as being born in the U.S. but was born in Germany. This happened to quite a few people before WWII. Wouldn’t that be ironic?
So, should we demand to see his birth certificate, declare it invalid once it is produced and therefore Trump isn’t really qualified to be president? Or just admit that he could have been born in the middle of the National Mall and he still wouldn’t be qualified to be President.
DD Wiz Premium Member over 5 years ago
Fourteenth Amendment “birthright citizenship” is what was intended by those writing the 14th Amendment.
Most of those who wrap themselves in the Constitution prove how much they really despise it.
When the 14th Amendment was passed, the inspiration was the newly-freed slaves.
This was the motivation, not the limitation.
The leaders writing this Amendment were not stupid. They wrote what they wrote. It is what it is.
They were in an expansive mood and they wrote the wording very broadly. The debates at the time show that the issue of foreigners giving birth in the United States was discussed and, like many other countries (including Canada and Mexico and more than 30 others), those who enacted the Amendment intended for them to be covered.
The only exceptions were those not under the “jurisdiction” of the United States. This included only indigenous Americans (whose reservations, at that time, were considered separate and sovereign nations prior to enacting the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934) or foreign diplomats, whose diplomatic immunity made them outside the “jurisdiction” of the United States (so they cannot be sued in civil court or charged in criminal court).
In contrast, anyone else in the United States, even if illegally, is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. They can be arrested, tried for crimes, or sued civilly.
When the Supreme Court decided 14th Amendment rights cases in Elk v. Wilkins (1884) and United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), rights were defined broadly and the judges referenced the Congressional debates that showed the intent of those who passed these Amendments.
And no, a president cannot repeal a Constitutional Amendment with an executive order (and seriously, Trump [without factual basis] whined about Obama abusing executive orders?)
Templo S.U.D. over 5 years ago
what about Donald Junior as well as Barron?
sirbadger over 5 years ago
The Trump kid that’s about to be indicted will be happy to leave the country.
kfccanada over 5 years ago
Awwwwwwwmake a really great deal this time……swap Trump for some good looking Senor! Pay him (Trump) in Mexican dollars and promise him a huge raise (also in Mexican dollars). Hand him a madeinmexico towel if he cries too hard.
smokysilver.so Premium Member over 5 years ago
It might also apply to Donald’s father. His father was going back and forth to Germany at the time his father was an embryo. Possibilities are that he was registered as being born in the U.S. but was born in Germany. This happened to quite a few people before WWII. Wouldn’t that be ironic?
Diane Lee Premium Member over 5 years ago
So, should we demand to see his birth certificate, declare it invalid once it is produced and therefore Trump isn’t really qualified to be president? Or just admit that he could have been born in the middle of the National Mall and he still wouldn’t be qualified to be President.
Richard S Russell Premium Member over 5 years ago
Bill Maher refers to the male Trumpian spawn as Uday and Qusay.