Al Ritter
Before we get into the whole discussion about if
Donald Trump can rescind this long misinterpreted amendment, let’s read the
actual wording of the fourteenth amendment.
The fourteenth amendment is broken up into 5 sections,
but only section one deals with the subject at hand. Section 1 is only two
sentences long.
Section
1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein
they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the
privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the
laws.
The intent of the
fourteenth amendment was to give citizenship to Black slaves after the Civil
war. Nowhere in the text does it grant citizenship to people illegally in this
country. In fact it expresses the exact oppose. The highlighted portion of the
text above specifically says “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” The term
jurisdiction thereof means according to the laws of the country.
The liberals have misconstrued the first sentence for decades as somehow granting citizenship to ANYONE that can birth a child in this country. Some liberal law scholars claim that the "jurisdiction" doesn't apply to a people illegally in this country, but only the SCOTUS can make this decision.
When, and I say when
purposely, because this WILL end up in Supreme Court eventually. The Supreme
Court’s conservative Justices usually sees the Constitution on the basis of “the
intentions of the framers.” They take the Constitution quite literally.
The Liberal Justices
however see the Constitution as a “living document” and able to be interpreted
differently as time changes.
It should be
interesting to see how an Executive Order may quite literally change our
country by becoming a legal precedent.
Listen to this podcast
by Mark Levin”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyiNjFrIZ5U&t=775s
10 comments:
Let’s be honest now. Everyone knew that if you come here illegally but as a pregnant person, and you have your baby in the USA, you got, with a bit of patience your citizenship because you now had a child with citizenship.
Secondly, if you are here illegally as a male, you impregnate a girl and insist she keeps the baby. With a bit of patience you got your citizenship.
And let’s be honest, people abused this system.
Now, imagine you have four wife’s and you impregnate everyone, and every wife claims the “father” (which is her brother! Hint hint!!!!) but they claim is the legit boyfriend or husband, he now gets citizenship. No imagine 10 million do this! Within one generation they contribute to 51% of your citizenship numbers and BOOM! You’re the minority in your own country, replaced because you had a bleeding heart. (See UK and many of the European countries) The new immigrants have replaced them and the citizens paid for their own replacement!
This back-door must be closed via a law, not an EO!
I am with Trump all the way !
The jurisdiction clause improves the intent a lot, but it just makes more sense to me that citizenship would be based upon the citizenship of the parents at all times, as children should live with their parents.
A tourist or even one on a visa is here as a temporary arrangement. Why would a country "keep" their children while removing the parents? This just seems unethical.
I always wondered how the Dems could interpret the 14th that way
End it now, two illegals birthing a child does not a legal citizens make on any soil.
Wrong!
Wrong
Not for people that enter our country illegally
Trump is right.
Just like two wrongs don't make a right.........two illegals don't make a legal
Post a Comment