Tuesday, August 25, 2015

Continue Birthright Citizenship?

(This blog post is lengthy and, therefore, will remain here for several days so that readers will have time to consider the topic before leaping to taking a position. Also, please see the blog post published on Saturday, August 22, 2015; I am seeking advice about a personal matter)

Donald Trump's immigration plan has ignited a firestorm of discussions about the matter of illegal immigration, a problem that can and should be laid at the feet of both the Democratic and Republican Parties. Stories such as this one add more fuel to the fire: DHS Kept Secret the Release Of Violent Criminal Illegal Immigrants: Local law enforcement ‘perplexed’ over controversial policy.

Trump's published statement about immigration reform contains the following:
End birthright citizenship. This remains the biggest magnet for illegal immigration. By a 2:1 margin, voters say it’s the wrong policy, including Harry Reid who said “no sane country” would give automatic citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants.
Read Trump's entire statement HERE

What, exactly, does the Constitution say about birthright citizenship? Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment reads as follows:
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.
What does jurisdiction entail? According to this (emphases mine):
...It should be noted that the condition of the father is what determines whether someone is born an alien or not because under U.S. law citizenship of wives and children always followed that of the father. And of course the status of the father was what determined the citizenship of a child born under law of nature.

[...]

...[C]itizenship by birth is established by the sovereign jurisdiction the United States already has over the parents of the child, and that required that they owe allegiance exclusively to the United States – just as is required to become a naturalized citizen. It does not require a leap of faith to understand what persons, other than citizens themselves, under the Fourteenth Amendment are citizens of the United States by birth: Those aliens who have come with the intent to become U.S. citizens, who had first complied with the laws of naturalization in declaring their intent and renounce all prior allegiances....

[...]

...There is no way in the world anyone can claim “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” affirms the feudal common law doctrine of birth citizenship to aliens because such doctrine by operation creates a “double allegiance” between separate nations.

If there is one inescapable truth to the text and debates, it is this: When Congress decided to require potential citizens to first be subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States they by default excluded all citizens of other nations temporarily residing in the U.S. who had no intention of becoming citizens themselves or, disqualified of doing so under naturalization laws. This was no oversight...
Read the rest HERE at my blog, where discussion of this topic is ongoing.

1 comment:

Redneck Texan said...

The Ratification Process was itself unconstitutional.

What originated as an instrument to punish the south morphed into a blueprint on how to subvert our immigration laws.