I think it’s plain that the 14th amendments does t guarantee citizenship to the children of illegals. If it did there would be no qualification. It would be “anyone born on American soil,” period.
“And subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is the key.
The language was adopted from the civil rights act of the 1860s that was trying to give citizenship to freed slaves before the 14th was ratified. That language was very clear: “not subject to a foreign power.” That is what “subject to the jurisdiction of” means.
People here illegally are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US government (this does not mean subject to its laws). They are subject to the jurisdiction of their own government.
This is why the native Americans did not receive citizenship under the 14th. They were subject to the jurisdiction of their sovereign nation. Not until the 1924 Indian citizenship act did they get US citizenship. Weird, right? It’s almost like that’s what the language of the 14th means.
The Supreme Court case that people cite to justify that SCOTUS has decided this was about the child of LEGAL residents. These were people who WERE subject to the jurisdiction of the US government.
No one has any idea what would have happened if the case had been about the child of illegal immigrants. Because it wasn’t. But it will be soon.
Think of it this way… if a foreign power invades your country in a war and members of their military have kids here, would you consider them US citizens? Hopefully not. So if those people here illegally wouldn’t have kids that would be considered citizens, why would any kind of foreigner here illegally?
The 14th amendment was CLEARLY about dealing with former slaves and their kids. Anything else would have been idiotic insanity
The way it has been abused to this day is an obvious perversion of its original intent.
I think it’s plain that the 14th amendments does t guarantee citizenship to the children of illegals. If it did there would be no qualification. It would be “anyone born on American soil,” period.
“And subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is the key.
The language was adopted from the civil rights act of the 1860s that was trying to give citizenship to freed slaves before the 14th was ratified. That language was very clear: “not subject to a foreign power.” That is what “subject to the jurisdiction of” means.
People here illegally are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US government (this does not mean subject to its laws). They are subject to the jurisdiction of their own government.
This is why the native Americans did not receive citizenship under the 14th. They were subject to the jurisdiction of their sovereign nation. Not until the 1924 Indian citizenship act did they get US citizenship. Weird, right? It’s almost like that’s what the language of the 14th means.
The Supreme Court case that people cite to justify that SCOTUS has decided this was about the child of LEGAL residents. These were people who WERE subject to the jurisdiction of the US government.
No one has any idea what would have happened if the case had been about the child of illegal immigrants. Because it wasn’t. But it will be soon.
Think of it this way… if a foreign power invades your country in a war and members of their military have kids here, would you consider them US citizens? Hopefully not. So if those people here illegally wouldn’t have kids that would be considered citizens, why would any kind of foreigner here illegally?
The 14th amendment was CLEARLY about dealing with former slaves and their kids. Anything else would have been idiotic insanity
The way it has been abused to this day is an obvious perversion of its original intent.
Agree entirely. Great summary. Plain language and original intent win the day.