Former Trump NSC Spokesman Michael Anton: Citizenship Should Not be a Birthright

A Supreme Court confirmation fight always raises constitutional hopes and stokes constitutional fears. With one more justice, they'll repeal Obamacare! If they get one more justice, they'll overturn Roe v. Wade ! To arms!
These periodic, now-inevitable freak-outs are a sad by-product of our country's drift away from political rule and over-investiture of power in the judiciary. But happily, the most urgent constitutional challenge of our time needn't wait on a court ruling. Each political branch of government has the constitutional authority needed to fix it.
I refer, here, to ending birthright citizenship.
The notion that simply being born within the geographical limits of the United States automatically confers U.S. citizenship is an absurdity -- historically, constitutionally, philosophically and practically.
Constitutional scholar Edward Erler has shown that the entire case for birthright citizenship is based on a deliberate misreading of the 14th Amendment. The purpose of that amendment was to resolve the question of citizenship for newly freed slaves. Following the Civil War, some in the South insisted that states had the right to deny citizenship to freedmen. In support, they cited 1857's disgraceful Dred Scott v. Sandford decision, which held that no black American could ever be a citizen of the United States.
A constitutional amendment was thus necessary to overturn Dred Scott and to define the precise meaning of American citizenship.
...
Some will argue that the Supreme Court has already settled this issue, establishing birthright citizenship in United States v. Wong Kim Ark. But this is wrong. The court has only ruled that children of legal residents are citizens. That doesn't change the status of children born to people living here illegally.
...
The problem can be fixed easily. Congress could clarify legislatively that the children of noncitizens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and thus not citizens under the 14th Amendment. But given the open-borders enthusiasm of congressional leaders of both parties, that's unlikely.
It falls, then, to Trump. An executive order could specify to federal agencies that the children of noncitizens are not citizens.
...
Birthright citizenship was a mistake whose time has gone.

Although the courts would surely rule such an EO unconstitutional, Anton seems to be proposing that Trump dare them to so rule it, and he also seems to be arguing that the President, who is a co-equal partner with the Courts, insist that his authority is just as strong as the courts', and basically take the Jacksonian position vis a vis the courts. (IIRC: "The courts have made their ruling; now let them enforce it.")

Seems a bit unlikely, but I like where his head's at.

Posted by: Ace of Spades at 05:27 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 Rresh one!

Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 05:27 PM (yJ9Jf)

2 trifecta of willowedness.

Posted by: LASue at July 18, 2018 05:28 PM (Z48ZB)

3 With misspellings in the comments already!

Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 05:28 PM (yJ9Jf)

4 * stops playing accordion *

Fresh thread smell!

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, SMR and Ancient Slavonaut Newsletters at July 18, 2018 05:29 PM (fA1SL)

5 Uh, right now the courts are ignoring flagrant illegal aliens. I like his moxie, but it's a huge waste of time.

The President has been making very reasonable immigration decisiona thus far. I agree this needs to be done, but we have bigger problems.

Posted by: trev006 at July 18, 2018 05:30 PM (S6rSu)

6 What was that scene in [Kingsman of all the heads exploding. Such an EO would have a similar effect I believe. Go Trump!

Posted by: Anna Puma (HQCaR) at July 18, 2018 05:30 PM (TSuBZ)

7 *prepares to fire for effect in the direction of the next accordion sound*

Posted by: Bandersnatch at July 18, 2018 05:30 PM (fuK7c)

8 Hmmmm, let me think on this a bit

Posted by: Skip at July 18, 2018 05:30 PM (pHfeF)

9 read it. Rookie mistake.

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at July 18, 2018 05:30 PM (Zmczq)

10 Let's do this thing. A bit late, but let's do it.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, SMR and Ancient Slavonaut Newsletters at July 18, 2018 05:30 PM (fA1SL)

11 Bandersnatch has an Accordionwerfer?

Posted by: Anna Puma (HQCaR) at July 18, 2018 05:31 PM (TSuBZ)

12 How many Divisions them Courts got?

Posted by: garrett at July 18, 2018 05:31 PM (J0CvP)

13 take the Jacksonian position vis a vis the courts. (IIRC: "The courts have made their ruling; now let them enforce it.")
---
That would be one big conflagration of lib hair.

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 05:31 PM (vDqXW)

14 11. He fears the war-drum of the SMR.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, SMR and Ancient Slavonaut Newsletters at July 18, 2018 05:31 PM (fA1SL)

15 Just getting born here by a non citizen, sure that should disqualify you outright.
But has me thinking even beyond this.

Posted by: Skip at July 18, 2018 05:31 PM (pHfeF)

16 Verry interesting

Posted by: Sgt. Schultz at July 18, 2018 05:31 PM (LISuA)

17 Fucking finally!

Posted by: Hobbiehawk at July 18, 2018 05:32 PM (Qot/z)

18 Would Maxine Waters Hair combust or explode?

Posted by: Anna Puma (HQCaR) at July 18, 2018 05:32 PM (TSuBZ)

19 Can we get rid of all the mexicans?

Posted by: Mr. Garrison at July 18, 2018 05:32 PM (J0CvP)

20 There are some Americans born here of American parents that I'd like to persuade to leave as well.

Posted by: Huck Follywood, dedicated to coffee at July 18, 2018 05:32 PM (LISuA)

21
How many Divisions them Courts got?
Posted by: garrett

Who writes the checks?

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at July 18, 2018 05:32 PM (IqV8l)

22 I say Trump should go for it and see if it spurs Congress to start doing its actual job for once.

Posted by: kathysaysso at July 18, 2018 05:32 PM (vkS2Z)

23
The Houston World Series of Dog Shows runs until Sunday. It's only Wednesday and I'm already exhausted.
We started at 8:00 AM and won't be done here until nearly 7:00. Then go home and go to work.

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at July 18, 2018 05:33 PM (CIRpK)

24 Wong Kim Ark was a deliberate misreading of the 14th amendment. Yes trump could kill it with an EO but then some Obama judge in HI or CA would overrule him. Yes, congress needs act and pass some new immigration laws that undo a lot of Obama shit.

But the Dems would oppose it and the RNCe would help them.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at July 18, 2018 05:33 PM (mpXpK)

25 Anton's right---but good luck with that.

Posted by: JoeF. at July 18, 2018 05:33 PM (y8Foj)

26 I like Mexicans. It's the Frenchies I'd like to get rid of.

Posted by: Huck Follywood, dedicated to coffee at July 18, 2018 05:33 PM (LISuA)

27 "The problem can be fixed easily. Congress could clarify legislatively that the children of noncitizens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and thus not citizens under the 14th Amendment."

And the citizens would support the clarification or an Amendment that clarifies the 14th. The problem, however, isn't the voter; it's Congress. They'll never, ever do it. Not ever. Because they don't represent citizens in this matter; they represent interests.

Posted by: AnonyBotymousDrivel at July 18, 2018 05:33 PM (6eEQ+)

28
hear, hear!

Posted by: concrete girl at July 18, 2018 05:34 PM (BVthB)

29 Citizenship isn't, apparently, a bar for voting, owning property, collecting government benefits, being defended in court pro bono, or any other damned thing we used to consider a perk of citizenship.

So, who cares what they are called? If there are here, they get stuff, on my dime.

Until we get serious about deporting all of them, citizenship means about as much as one person-one vote. It just doesn't exist in any meaningful form any more.

Posted by: tcn in AK at July 18, 2018 05:34 PM (7UW64)

30 Stop deferring to the Court.

To do so affirms that the Three Branches are not Co-Equal.

Do what you want to do ... and see what power the Court has to respond.

Pro-Tip ... History says The Court will make a big fucking deal about how they find The Executive's Use of Power was legal all along.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 05:34 PM (fiGNd)

31 Sum Ting Wong with Wong Kim Ark.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at July 18, 2018 05:34 PM (IqV8l)

32 I am not here.

Casper will be my stand in.

Don't be skeerd (sic)...he is a friendly ghost.

Muahahahahaha

He is also a US citizen. He's not sure if Zombies should be citizens.

Posted by: platypus, gg channel at July 18, 2018 05:34 PM (CiCKR)

33 How to easily annex Canada.

Promise them if they vote to join the US, Quebec becomes a free country.

Posted by: Anna Puma (HQCaR) at July 18, 2018 05:34 PM (TSuBZ)

34 Do it you magnificent bastard!!!

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at July 18, 2018 05:34 PM (Zmczq)

35 Sorry, this is idiocy. A gross misreading of what can be done by an Executive Order. Trump can order the Executive Branch not to treat them as citizens, but an EO has absolutely no binding power on the Court System. Any Federal Judge in the country can overturn that EO, and then it will go to the Supreme Court. And, absent congressional legislation or a constitutional amendment, Trump will lose 9-0, the humiliating blow that the left and the deep stated are dying to see happen to him.

Again, this proposal may feel good for a moment, but this is as stupid on our side as the attempt to abolish ICE is on the dems side.

Get Congress to change the rule - Yes. Pass a Constitutional Amendment - Yes. Have Trump do it with an EO? No, no, no, no, no. Absolute disaster if that is attempted.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 05:35 PM (k1TUh)

36 Great, now I'll never be able to sleep tonight with this schadenboner.

#Winning: it's what's for breakfast, lunch, and dinner ...

Posted by: ShainS at July 18, 2018 05:35 PM (dHJpq)

37 Free chocolate cake should be a birth right, though ...

Posted by: Adriane the Political Elite Critic ... at July 18, 2018 05:35 PM (AoK0a)

38 I'm just gonna come up here and let you finish but first I wanna say, George Washington, that you had a good presidency...but trump is really the real winner of the best presidecny ever.

Posted by: Krystal Slider Enthusiast at July 18, 2018 05:36 PM (GV6hq)

39 Sure the EO is probably illegal but watch all the feckless fops in Congress and the seditious courts show the American people what traitors they are. And just before November.

Posted by: Anna Puma (HQCaR) at July 18, 2018 05:36 PM (TSuBZ)

40 20 There are certainly a lot of Leftists who should be tossed out, Ocasia Cortez is sure capitalism is on its way out so why should she stay because capitalism isn't going anywhere.

Posted by: Skip at July 18, 2018 05:36 PM (pHfeF)

41
We are criminals in the eyes of the enlightened world for not letting everyone who wants to come here into our racist, misogynist, rapist, war-mongering, ruled-by-literally-Hitler craphole of a country.

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at July 18, 2018 05:36 PM (CIRpK)

42 38 I'm just gonna come up here and let you finish but first I wanna say, George Washington, that you had a good presidency...but trump is really the real winner of the best presidecny ever.
Posted by: Krystal Slider Enthusiast at July 18, 2018 05:36 PM (GV6hq)

Kanye, sit down.

Posted by: Taylor Swift at July 18, 2018 05:37 PM (CiCKR)

43 seems to be arguing that the President, who is a co-equal partner with the Courts, insist that his authority is just as strong as the courts

SCOTUS has never held that babies born to illegals or tourists are US citizens.

Unless and until there is a SCOTUS ruling, POTUS should take the position that babies of illegals and tourists are not US citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Posted by: Huh? What chu talkin bout Willis? at July 18, 2018 05:37 PM (DuAZ5)

44 one justice's misreading of the 14th (?) amendment to extend birthright to all folks here forever and forever and not to clarifying the children of freed slaves or whatever in 1865 are american citizens, whatever the southern states try to pull

it's dicta

Posted by: Krystal Slider Enthusiast at July 18, 2018 05:37 PM (GV6hq)

45 Weren't there a bunch of articles from lefties recently handwringing over Russian birth-tourism? Maybe there's more support on the other side for ending birthright citizenship than one might expect.

Posted by: Xander Crews at July 18, 2018 05:38 PM (hmzzf)

46 24 Wong Kim Ark was a deliberate misreading of the 14th amendment. "

The Supreme Court isn't Final because it is always right, th Supreme Court is Always Right because it is Final.

people on the losing side of every Supreme Court case that has been heard for the last 200 years all say that the Supreme Court "deliberately misread the law." Whenever anyone says those words, they should do so while holding their forefinger and thumb at a right angle on their forehead.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 05:38 PM (k1TUh)

47
The Mexicans and the Frenchies are one thing. Those hook-nosed, conniving Phoenician goniffs are quite another.

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at July 18, 2018 05:39 PM (CIRpK)

48 Get Congress to change the rule - Yes. Pass a
Constitutional Amendment - Yes. Have Trump do it with an EO? No, no,
no, no, no. Absolute disaster if that is attempted.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 05:35 PM (k1TUh)

*Looks down at wilting schadenboner*

Thanks a bunch Tom.

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at July 18, 2018 05:39 PM (Zmczq)

49 Citizen Tests For ALL!

Posted by: garrett at July 18, 2018 05:39 PM (J0CvP)

50 ICE has been raiding California for hotels that cater to Chinese birthright tourism.

Posted by: Anna Puma (HQCaR) at July 18, 2018 05:39 PM (TSuBZ)

51 Make it retroactive to 1965.

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at July 18, 2018 05:39 PM (4ErVI)

52 Wong Kim Ark was a deliberate misreading of the 14th amendment. Yes trump could kill it with an EO but then some Obama judge in HI or CA would overrule him. Yes, congress needs act and pass some new immigration laws that undo a lot of Obama shit.

But the Dems would oppose it and the RNCe would help them.
Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at July 18, 2018 05:33 PM (mpXpK)
---
Plus that, but thanks to the way the courts have ruled on things, if birthright citizenship is considered a right--thanks to Robert B. Fucking Taney, they cannot be stripped of that "right" by legislation, but only by substantive due process.

It's kind of what happened in California with the gays. Prop 8 was not enforced, a bunch of municipalities started marrying gays like crazy, and then it was ruled that you could only unmarry these people by taking each couple to court--because it had already been cited that marriage was a *right*.

That would bifurcate our legal process, with judges not accepting that it can be undone by legislation--because a lot of them DO believe in a suicide pact these days--and an executive that refuses to listen to the council of the courts.

Which is why I think we ought to amend the Constitution to slap judges with slimy fish.

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 05:39 PM (vDqXW)

53 We're so racist we elect latina commies to high office, plus, we like our races so mixed we elected the first black AND white commie to the presidency. That's just how we roll, us racists.

And we hate women so much we let Maxine Waters and Frederica Wilson and Nancy Pelosi get rich off their "public service" and keep sending them back for more. That's just how misogynist we really are.

And Trump is such a Nazi that he....well.... okay, I'm stumped on this one. What was it he supposedly did? He didn't. So, not a Nazi.

Posted by: tcn in AK at July 18, 2018 05:40 PM (7UW64)

54 Until we get serious about deporting all of them, citizenship means about as much as one person-one vote. It just doesn't exist in any meaningful form any more.

Posted by: tcn in AK

You are upset because they just closed the last Blockbuster in AK.

Posted by: Braenyard _now serving Buffalo Chips to the DNC at July 18, 2018 05:40 PM (VeUrT)

55 There are a lot of illegal Russians up here...

I want them out, too.

Also. That illegal who started the Colorado Wildfires. Hang him and then bill his country of origin for damages.

Posted by: garrett at July 18, 2018 05:40 PM (J0CvP)

56 Sorry, this is idiocy. A gross misreading of what can be done by an Executive Order.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 05:35 PM (k1TUh)

Tom ... Republicans are way too wrapped up with the notion of Law.

We are at the Power stage of the game.

Trump ... use the Power of the Executive. And then watch, and laugh, at how quickly the Courts decide that The Golden Scalp-Weasel's Use of Executive Power was The Most Lawful Thing Ever.

Do it, Trump. And secure a Second Term.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 05:40 PM (fiGNd)

57 Accordion Solo!

Posted by: Archer at July 18, 2018 05:41 PM (gmo/4)

58 Sorry, this is idiocy. A gross misreading of what can be done by an Executive Order [by a republican president].

-

FIFY

Posted by: Krystal Slider Enthusiast at July 18, 2018 05:42 PM (GV6hq)

59 You are upset because they just closed the last Blockbuster in AK.
Posted by: Braenyard _now serving Buffalo Chips to the DNC at July 18, 2018 05:40 PM (VeUrT)

Well, it isn't gone yet, but it's damned close.

And yes, they still have VHS tapes, if you want to pick some up cheap.

Posted by: tcn in AK at July 18, 2018 05:42 PM (7UW64)

60 57 Accordion Solo!
Posted by: Archer at July 18, 2018 05:41 PM (gmo/4)

Who knew she could do that with her asshole?

Posted by: tcn in AK at July 18, 2018 05:42 PM (7UW64)

61 The current situation allows for poeple to enter US illegally, commit terrorist acts, have a child and that child is a US citizen. How stupid is that?

There is a rule that children of diplomats born in other countries do not become citizens of those other countries. Why should the average joe be exempt from that rule?

Posted by: Decaf at July 18, 2018 05:43 PM (Mymqt)

62 Illegal aliens are no more subject to the jurisdiction of the United States then were the Indian tribes when the Constitution was written.

I mean the absurdity here is large. If a Japanese soldier in World War II impregnated a Korean comfort girl on Alaskan soil would that child have been a citizen?

Posted by: 18-1 at July 18, 2018 05:44 PM (+DkQm)

63 If one is too young to vote, pay taxes, - is he truly a citizen?

Posted by: Fritz at July 18, 2018 05:44 PM (RfYYV)

64 Well, Congress would act quickly. But it would certainly flush out the open borders scum who inhabit its halls.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at July 18, 2018 05:44 PM (wYseH)

65 >>>50 ICE has been raiding California for hotels that cater to Chinese birthright tourism.

I'm not an American, but I did sleep in a Holliday Inn Express last night.

Posted by: Mother with Chinese triplets at 8 months. at July 18, 2018 05:44 PM (3Pm7a)

66 The CoC and Clan Bush's mortal enemy this guy.

Posted by: Barack Obama at July 18, 2018 05:44 PM (r9UYA)

67 49 Citizen Tests For ALL!
Posted by: garrett at July 18, 2018 05:39 PM (J0CvP)

Except illegal Mexicans. (Don't need to know. Love is all we need.)

Except Millenials (tl;dr test)

Except Socialists/Communists (don't agree with it)

Except POC (white privilege test is unfair to them.)

Posted by: Nancy Pelosi, Jeb Bush, Al Sharpton, HRC, et.al. at July 18, 2018 05:44 PM (CiCKR)

68 off mocha latte sock

Posted by: Under Fire at July 18, 2018 05:45 PM (r9UYA)

69 >>>And yes, they still have VHS tapes, if you want to pick some up cheap.

I need to return some video tapes.

Posted by: Patrick Bateman at July 18, 2018 05:46 PM (3Pm7a)

70 All this deep thinking over how PDT the 11th level chessmaster could write an EO that would challenge SCOTUS, blah blah blah...

Just. Build. The. F*cking. Wall.

Posted by: Hands at July 18, 2018 05:47 PM (EzdLW)

71 Ann Coulter, 2010, from 'Human Events':

The very author of the citizenship clause, Sen. Jacob Howard of
Michigan, expressly said: "This will not, of course, include persons
born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the
families of ambassadors or foreign ministers."

https://tinyurl.com/o7r6lk8

Posted by: mallfly the Peach of Hoboken at July 18, 2018 05:47 PM (KxbBq)

72
I think that a constitutional amendment from the states could clarify this. So we need 2/3 of the state legislatures which I think is possible.

I would propose the language say 1 parent as citizen gives you citizenship no matter where born in the world. With dna, this is easily verifiable.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at July 18, 2018 05:47 PM (r+sAi)

73 Sorry, this is idiocy. A gross misreading of what
can be done by an Executive Order.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 05:35 PM (k1TUh)

I understand your point, but congress has ignored its responsibilities for years by allowing federal departments to, essentially, make law via interpretation of congressional regulation.

So Trump could easily assist the State Department and the various other agencies..via executive order...in clarifying the law that governs citizenship.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at July 18, 2018 05:47 PM (wYseH)

74 So I'm a citizen of any country right? Checking the map for nymphostan. Oh there it is, right next boobiestan.

Posted by: Tinfoilbaby at July 18, 2018 05:48 PM (f2wz/)

75 All this deep thinking over how PDT the 11th level chessmaster could write an EO that would challenge SCOTUS, blah blah blah...
--------------------------------------------

Let Anton write it.

Posted by: JoeF. at July 18, 2018 05:48 PM (y8Foj)

76 Citizen Tests For ALL!
Posted by: garrett at July 18, 2018 05:39 PM (J0CvP)

Not Muslims though, their "religion" demands a caliphate, so they get a religious exception.

Posted by: Keith Ellison at July 18, 2018 05:49 PM (CiCKR)

77 Also, there is another SCOTUS ruling on immigrant citizenship besides Wong Kim Ark IIANNM it was a case arising in TX over sending children to TX schools and the expense to property owners.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at July 18, 2018 05:49 PM (mpXpK)

78 All this deep thinking over how PDT the 11th level chessmaster could write an EO that would challenge SCOTUS, blah blah blah...

Just. Build. The. F*cking. Wall.
Posted by: Hands at July 18, 2018 05:47 PM (EzdLW)

We have a winner. Collect your prize at the cash window.

And let's see how the Supreme Court shuts down a Construction Crew. Or the Federal Courts.

Exactly how much power do they have ... if nobody else cares ?

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 05:49 PM (fiGNd)

79 I have heard of the US Pregnancy tour for years.

Posted by: Skip at July 18, 2018 05:50 PM (pHfeF)

80 re 62: that Coulter piece I posted above noted that, if I recall correctly, a late 19th century Supreme Court ruling that said that Indians were not citizens because they were under tribal jurisdiction. Too lazy to go back and get the exact quote.

Posted by: mallfly the Peach of Hoboken at July 18, 2018 05:50 PM (KxbBq)

81 Illegal and questionable foreigners birthing babies in America is a worldwide industry and it must be stopped. Period.

Posted by: Eromero at July 18, 2018 05:50 PM (zLDYs)

82 Just. Build. The. F*cking. Wall.
Posted by: Hands at July 18, 2018 05:47 PM (EzdLW)

Now. Please. We will even help. Freely.

Posted by: Actual American Citizens at July 18, 2018 05:50 PM (CiCKR)

83 Not Muslims though, their "religion" demands a caliphate, so they get a religious exception.
Posted by: Keith Ellison at July 18, 2018 05:49 PM
(CiCKR)

So let's give them Caliph-ornia and be done with it....

Posted by: JoeF. at July 18, 2018 05:51 PM (y8Foj)

84 The constitution really is a suicide pact.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at July 18, 2018 05:51 PM (IqV8l)

85 Why would being a ward-of-the-state be conflated with being an active citizen?

Posted by: Fritz at July 18, 2018 05:51 PM (RfYYV)

86 It occurred to me today...

What is the difference between the 29 y.o. Russian female student and the illegal immigrant rabble rousers that visit Senators and Representatives and attend public functions and then report back to their "handlers"?

There should be thousands in jail.

Posted by: Joe McCarthy at July 18, 2018 05:51 PM (If3tB)

87 I posted above noted that, if I recall correctly, a late 19th century Supreme Court ruling that said that Indians were not citizens because they were under tribal jurisdiction. Too lazy to go back and get the exact quote.
Posted by: mallfly the Peach of Hoboken at July 18, 2018 05:50 PM (KxbBq)
---
It's what was clearly meant by "subject to its jurisdiction".

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 05:51 PM (vDqXW)

88
I have heard of the US Pregnancy tour for years.
Posted by: Skip

Was that Heart and Blondie?

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at July 18, 2018 05:52 PM (IqV8l)

89 sock fail.

Posted by: golfman at July 18, 2018 05:52 PM (If3tB)

90 The constitution really is a suicide pact.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at July 18, 2018 05:51 PM (IqV8l)
---
It's just been turned into one by our betters, our experts in law, our judges.

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 05:52 PM (vDqXW)

91 This is a DAMN fine idea!!

Posted by: hobbitopoly at July 18, 2018 05:53 PM (MX7xj)

92 Changing the absurd citizen rights if born here with the current Leftists No Borders is going to be a up hill fight.

Posted by: Skip at July 18, 2018 05:53 PM (pHfeF)

93 "the Jacksonian argument": Not totally unrelated, but an argument against Jackson's legitimacy was that he was born at sea, not in South Carolina (Waxhaw, now in North Carolina) as he maintained.

Posted by: SloPitch Whiffer at July 18, 2018 05:53 PM (C7o9e)

94 iirc
_Diane Feinstein's husband is Bechtel.
_Nancy Pelosi's family has an offshore canning factory and onshore vinyard/winery.
_Jane Harmon's husband is Harmon of Harmon Kardon speakers.
_Maxine Waters' husband is a bank.

Looks like they are/were very exclusive K Street operatives.

Posted by: Braenyard _now serving Buffalo Chips to the DNC at July 18, 2018 05:53 PM (VeUrT)

95
Trump needs zombie Robert Moses to build the wall, especially if tolls can be charged.

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at July 18, 2018 05:53 PM (CIRpK)

96 Weren't there a bunch of articles from lefties recently handwringing over Russian birth-tourism? Maybe there's more support on the other side for ending birthright citizenship than one might expect.
Posted by: Xander Crews at July 18, 2018 05:38 PM (hmzzf)

I suspect those exact same people support Central American birth-tourism.

The handwringing over Russians is just because Russians are the boogeymen du jour.

Posted by: Emmie at July 18, 2018 05:53 PM (4HMW8)

97
Oooh, that would be awesome, let american citizens bring fence, blocks, rocks, whatever to the border. Take a weekend once a year and go to the border.
You know damn well some people would just move there and start building. Just allow it by law.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at July 18, 2018 05:53 PM (r+sAi)

98 Illegal and questionable foreigners birthing babies in America is ~~a worldwide industry and it must be stopped. Period.~~ no basis for conferring citizenship.

Posted by: Eromero at July 18, 2018 05:50 PM (zLDYs)

Posted by: Dennis the Peasant at July 18, 2018 05:54 PM (QLvwG)

99 If birthright citizenship is ended, will that clear out the maternity wards in the border states, or will they still come for the "indigent" free healthcare?

Posted by: Blanco Basura -It's OK, I'm with the banned at July 18, 2018 05:54 PM (h8kDo)

100 The constitution really is a suicide pact.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at July 18, 2018 05:51 PM (IqV8l)
---
It's just been turned into one by our betters, our experts in law, our judges.
Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 05:52 PM (vDqXW)

Because for too long the Democrats have been allowed to turn SCOTUS into their own personal "Congress of Last Resort" to get the green light on things they could never get passed by the real Congress --whose members, unlike the judges--are subject to the oversight of voters.

Posted by: JoeF. at July 18, 2018 05:55 PM (y8Foj)

101 To be clear, the issue at the heart of his case is the very plain wording of the 14th Amendment: "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."

As to what LEGALLY defines "Subject to the Jurisdiction of the United States", I point those who are curious to 31 CFR 515.329, and 515.330 , of the current Federal Code.

Briefly put, ANY person within the United States physically is legally defined as being Subject to the Jurisdiction of the United States. This is not philosophy, or rhetoric - this is current Black Letter Law as passed by the US Congress. Every US Court is sworn to uphold this law.

THIS is why Trump cannot change this with an EO. No President can change Black Letter Law that has been passed by Congress. Only Congress can do that.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 05:55 PM (k1TUh)

102 93 "the Jacksonian argument": Not totally unrelated, but an argument against Jackson's legitimacy was that he was born at sea, not in South Carolina (Waxhaw, now in North Carolina) as he maintained.

Posted by: SloPitch Whiffer at July 18, 2018 05:53 PM (C7o9e)

They performed the custom of the time and threw him in the water to see if he would sink or swim and he ended up swimming to Waxhaw where he was given citizenship.

It's a little known story in American history.

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at July 18, 2018 05:55 PM (4ErVI)

103
Too lazy to go back and get the exact quote.

This phrase would be in every footnote of Justice Barack Obama's opinions.

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at July 18, 2018 05:56 PM (CIRpK)

104 I have heard of the US Pregnancy tour for years.
Posted by: Skip

---
The Chinese have been doing this for years, of course, but I was surprised to learn the Russians flock to Miami on B2 visas for medical treatment:

https://www.tourism-review.com/birth-tourism-in-the-us-to-end-news5286

Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at July 18, 2018 05:56 PM (gUCYC)

105 I saw a birthright werewolf ordering the Wong Kim Ark seafood platter at Lee Ho Fook's

Posted by: Zombie Warren Zevon at July 18, 2018 05:56 PM (EzdLW)

106 Countries who allow dual citizenship are working on subversion. When I was a pup, kids born overseas who had dual citizenships had to declare at age 21 which one they were keeping.

Disgusted by the Mexican citizens voting in US elections as dual citizens mostly from seeing German/Turkish duals. Jorge Ramos as a well-known example. Talk about interfering in elections!

Posted by: mustbequantum at July 18, 2018 05:57 PM (MIKMs)

107 @35: see #13

Posted by: The Inexplicable Dr. Julius Strangepork at July 18, 2018 05:57 PM (f5Wtc)

108 Speaking of judicial overreach, I see the California Supreme Court just knocked down Drapers plan to split it into three communist states.

Posted by: Marcus T at July 18, 2018 05:58 PM (qRp3J)

109 Do Russian babies vote Republican?

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at July 18, 2018 05:58 PM (IqV8l)

110 We are making the mistake of discounting the 4th branch of government. The department of justice.

Tell me I am wrong that; they do not rule this country?

Posted by: Heart at July 18, 2018 05:58 PM (LIhNq)

111
I saw a birthright werewolf ordering the Wong Kim Ark seafood platter at Lee Ho Fook's

Posted by: Zombie Warren Zevon at July 18, 2018 05:56 PM (EzdLW)

How was his hair?

Posted by: Count de Monet at July 18, 2018 05:58 PM (QLvwG)

112 re 103: if Justice Obama were anything like Sen Obama, he would just concur with whatever the other leftists wrote.

Posted by: mallfly the Peach of Hoboken at July 18, 2018 05:59 PM (KxbBq)

113 Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 05:55 PM (k1TUh)

Being physically within the United States may make you subject to jurisdiction (you kill someone - you go to jail), but it doesn't make you a citizen. If my cousin from Sweden visits me, it doesn't make her a citizen just because she's at a Cubs game.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 18, 2018 05:59 PM (lwiT4)

114 BTW, heard some talking head recently say that Justice Scalia opposed an Article V Convention of the States.

Anybody know if this is true and why, or should I get off my lazy ass and figure it out for myself?

Posted by: ShainS at July 18, 2018 05:59 PM (dHJpq)

115 Do Russian babies vote Republican?
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at July 18, 2018 05:58 PM (IqV8l)

Depends on who Uncle Vlad tells them to vote for

Posted by: JoeF. at July 18, 2018 05:59 PM (y8Foj)

116 Grammie, is jello salad a thing in Sweden?

Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at July 18, 2018 05:59 PM (gUCYC)

117 If my cousin from Sweden visits me, it doesn't make her a citizen just because she's at a Cubs game.

Cousin from Sweden.

Is she single?

Posted by: Bandersnatch at July 18, 2018 06:00 PM (fuK7c)

118 Speaking of judicial overreach, I see the California Supreme Court just knocked down Drapers plan to split it into three communist states.
Posted by: Marcus T at July 18, 2018 05:58 PM (qRp3J)

-------------

I'm thinking that is a good thing. I do not want to see 4 more Cali Dem Senators.

Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 06:00 PM (yJ9Jf)

119 111

I saw a birthright werewolf ordering the Wong Kim Ark seafood platter at Lee Ho Fook's

Posted by: Zombie Warren Zevon at July 18, 2018 05:56 PM (EzdLW)

How was his hair?

Posted by: Count de Monet at July 18, 2018 05:58 PM (QLvwG)

***
"Perfect!"

Posted by: Tony Manero at July 18, 2018 06:00 PM (Fb9aZ)

120 87 I posted above noted that, if I recall correctly, a late 19th century Supreme Court ruling that said that Indians were not citizens because they were under tribal jurisdiction. Too lazy to go back and get the exact quote.
Posted by: mallfly the Peach of Hoboken at July 18, 2018 05:50 PM

And that is why American Indians were not considered to be US Citizens until that was granted to them by the American Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.

Once again, proof that it takes Congressional Action to straighten these things out.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:00 PM (k1TUh)

121 If my cousin from Sweden visits me, it doesn't make her a citizen just because she's at a Cubs game.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 18, 2018 05:59 PM (lwiT4)

Yes, but it makes her a baseball fan, and that's a pretty good qualification.

Got pictures you could post? Topless would be best.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at July 18, 2018 06:01 PM (wYseH)

122 Grammie, is jello salad a thing in Sweden?

Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at July 18, 2018 05:59 PM (gUCYC)

No. Not bland enough.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 18, 2018 06:01 PM (lwiT4)

123 THIS is why Trump cannot change this with an EO. No President can change Black Letter Law that has been passed by Congress. Only Congress can do that.
Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 05:55 PM (k1TUh)

Tom ... Blah.

My entire life, there's always been good reasons why ObamaCare is just a Tax, Roe vs. Wade is about Privacy, Individual Ownership of Firearms isn't guaranteed, yada yada yada.

I just don't care. Trump ... sign the EO. Then let's see what happens.

We're way past the point of nuanced readings of words on paper. We're in the Who Has The Power Stage.

And while we're at it ... Helicopters are pretty damn cool.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:01 PM (fiGNd)

124 Sorry, Tom, but "subject to its jurisdiction" did not include Indians inside the physical borders of the US. This is why they put that condition in there.

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 06:02 PM (vDqXW)

125 They may as well quit voting in CA. Every decent law that's passed their SC kills.

Posted by: Braenyard _now serving Buffalo Chips to the DNC at July 18, 2018 06:02 PM (VeUrT)

126 Former Trump NSC Spokesman Michael Anton: Citizenship Should Not be a Birthright

Absolutely right.

An outbreak of common sense.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara, now with a spark of divinity at July 18, 2018 06:02 PM (ez9Rh)

127 How can just being born here make you a citizen? That's stupid. Does any other country do that?

Posted by: f'd at July 18, 2018 06:02 PM (UdKB7)

128 BTW, heard some talking head recently say that Justice Scalia opposed an Article V Convention of the States.

Anybody know if this is true and why, or should I get off my lazy ass and figure it out for myself?
Posted by: ShainS at July 18, 2018 05:59 PM (dHJpq)

I had a prof 30 years ago who was dead sent against something like this because he said that every current special-interest group will get their own pet issues ENSHRINED in the new Constitution.

I agree.

Posted by: JoeF. at July 18, 2018 06:02 PM (y8Foj)

129 Got pictures you could post? Topless would be best.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at July 18, 2018 06:01 PM (wYseH)

She's like 74. You might want to re-think that.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 18, 2018 06:02 PM (lwiT4)

130 57 Accordion Solo!

Han's long lost brother?

Posted by: Anachronda at July 18, 2018 06:02 PM (NmR1a)

131 She's like 74. You might want to re-think that.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 18, 2018 06:02 PM (lwiT4)

But you're only 29!

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at July 18, 2018 06:04 PM (wYseH)

132
122 Grammie, is jello salad a thing in Sweden?

----------

No. Not bland enough.

i dunno. i've seen boxes of celery-flavored jello in museums, which sounds to me like a much better idea than actual celery.

Posted by: Anachronda at July 18, 2018 06:04 PM (xGZ+b)

133 Wong Kim Ark was a deliberate misreading of the 14th amendment. Yes trump could kill it with an EO but then some Obama judge in HI or CA would overrule him. Yes, congress needs act and pass some new immigration laws that undo a lot of Obama shit.

Or it could go to the Supreme Court, preferably after the Notorious RBG joins the Choir Invisible and is replaced by an American.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara, now with a spark of divinity at July 18, 2018 06:05 PM (ez9Rh)

134 Not sure about the definition of "subject to jurisdiction" being set, and applied yet by a court in the case of an illegal alien.

But in any case, an EO is not the answer. As ace noted, quickly/easily struck down by the first court that sees it (after having been deemed improper, probably, by DOJ Office of Legal Counsel, just as they properly deemed Barky's Dream EO unconstitutional).

Tom Servo is right for a few reasons. Mechanically, Congress must fix this (fix can take different forms). Politically, and philosophically, this must be fixed the right way, and doing so brings benefits. As in - the issue is considered directly by the political branches, and acted on.

Posted by: rhomboid at July 18, 2018 06:05 PM (QDnY+)

135 I had a prof 30 years ago who was dead sent against something like this because he said that every current special-interest group will get their own pet issues ENSHRINED in the new Constitution.

I agree.
Posted by: JoeF. at July 18, 2018 06:02 PM (y8Foj)

--------------

If I understand things correctly, an Article V Convention is different than a Constitutional Convention. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 06:06 PM (yJ9Jf)

136 If my cousin from Sweden visits me, it doesn't make her a citizen just because she's at a Cubs game.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 18, 2018 05:59 PM (lwiT4)

If a pig is born in a stable, that doesn't make him a horse.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara, now with a spark of divinity at July 18, 2018 06:06 PM (ez9Rh)

137 Politically and Philosophically ...

... fuck that noise.

Trump - sign the EO. And win 2020. And beyond.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:07 PM (fiGNd)

138 127 How can just being born here make you a citizen? That's stupid. Does any other country do that?

Posted by: f'd at July 18, 2018 06:02 PM (UdKB7)

Not that I'm aware of it.

Apparently it works here because THE MAGIC OF AMERICA! and miracle dirt and something something.

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at July 18, 2018 06:07 PM (4ErVI)

139 Blanco Basura @ 99- Indigent health care, do you ask?I'd say in Texas it runs well over 50 percent of all treated, and paid for by you the taxpayer.

Posted by: Eromero at July 18, 2018 06:07 PM (zLDYs)

140 The wag I have hear this US Pregnancy Tour works its it gives the child born duel citizenship which gives them a double chance in life .

Posted by: Skip at July 18, 2018 06:07 PM (pHfeF)

141 If a pig is born in a stable, that doesn't make him a horse.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara, now with a spark of divinity at July 18, 2018 06:06 PM (ez9Rh)

There's a weiner joke in there somewhere, but I can't formulate it.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 18, 2018 06:08 PM (lwiT4)

142 "If a pig is born in a stable, that doesn't make him a horse."

Exactly!

Posted by: The chicken at July 18, 2018 06:08 PM (UdKB7)

143 Come here and have your baby or an abortion!

That offer comes with a pickle on the side and a generous helping of schmaltz!

Posted by: Marcus T at July 18, 2018 06:08 PM (qRp3J)

144 If I understand things correctly, an Article V Convention is different than a Constitutional Convention. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 06:06 PM (yJ9Jf)

You're right.

Article V means we dissolve everything. And I mean everything.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:09 PM (fiGNd)

145 Not many countries in the entire world recognize birth rights

Posted by: Skip at July 18, 2018 06:09 PM (pHfeF)

146 Being physically within the United States may make you subject to jurisdiction (you kill someone - you go to jail), but it doesn't make you a citizen. If my cousin from Sweden visits me, it doesn't make her a citizen just because she's at a Cubs game."

Grammie, and anyone else who wonders the same, look carefully at the two legal texts I posted and consider how they work in conjunction with each other. No, of course your cousin from Sweden isn't a "citizen", but while she is here, she IS "Subject to the Jurisdiction of the United States", as defined in the Federal Code. Meaning, basically, that if she has too many beers and wrecks her car on the way home, she can be arrested by the local police.

NOW, go back and look at the 14th Amendment - the wording is very plain, and clear. "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." If your cousin has a baby while she is here, that baby is instantly "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" as currently defined in the Federal Code, and as such instantly becomes a full US Citizen. The mother doesn't, but the baby does.

there is no ambiguity here at all. This is where Birthright Citizenship comes from, and it is a foolish lie to say it is a "misunderstanding" or "misinterpretation." No - Currently it is the ONLY POSSIBLE legal interpretation, unless Congress chooses to change the definitions found in the CFR, or until a Constitutional Amendment is passed.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:09 PM (k1TUh)

147 I have heard of the US Pregnancy tour for years.

The worst story, perhaps apocryphal, was some pregnant Chinese chick who has trying to hold that thought until she got over U.S. airspace.

Shoulda flown on an American flag carrier, dummy.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara, now with a spark of divinity at July 18, 2018 06:10 PM (ez9Rh)

148 If I understand things correctly, an Article V Convention is different than a Constitutional Convention. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 06:06 PM (yJ9Jf)

You're right.

Article V means we dissolve everything. And I mean everything.
Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:09 PM (fiGNd)

--------------

Well, that certainly sounds particularly ungood.

Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 06:10 PM (yJ9Jf)

149 anton is the guy erin burnett tried messing with.
i'm glad he cancelled his cnn appearance.

Posted by: concrete girl at July 18, 2018 06:12 PM (BVthB)

150 Tom ... the more you talk on this ...

... the more I'm absolutely positive Trump should sign that EO.

Nobody on the street gives two shits about the Legal History of this. They just hate, and hate is the right word, the notion that somebody can cross the border and draw welfare.

Trump ... sign the fucking EO. And Win.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:12 PM (fiGNd)

151 Huh. The end of the article states that the Court would/should go along with the EO because of the Constitution. I assume precedent law too, as evidenced by the recent decision to uphold the travel ban.

I would think the Jacksonian approach would require the Court to rule against the EO, and then for Trump to openly defy it.

Like Worchester v Georgia.

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at July 18, 2018 06:13 PM (UiRxW)

152 Just fyi, Canada also has birthright citizenship.

Also, the vast majority of dual citizens in the United States are Jewish citizens who also hold citizenship in Israel.

All restrictions against the dual citizenship of one who was a US Citizen by birth were found to be unconstitutional in 1965.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:13 PM (k1TUh)

153 Shoulda flown on an American flag carrier, dummy.

It may be apocryphal but it's from before the internet so it's just what I was told...

I was told that Germany has one birthright citizenship clause which applies to babies born on Lufthansa flights. And Lufthansa doesn't let anyone past 8 months pregnant fly.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at July 18, 2018 06:14 PM (fuK7c)

154 After Trump is re-elected and the Congress goes larger Repub majority this is possible. Also do away with dual citizenship not for kids of parents of two citizenships but for adults by age 25. Pick one.

Posted by: Lester at July 18, 2018 06:14 PM (LfJIn)

155 Is this a good time to bring up the Natural Born Citizen requirement for being eligible to become President?

Posted by: Count de Monet at July 18, 2018 06:14 PM (QLvwG)

156 It's dicta
----
Dicta? It almost freakin' killed'ya!

Posted by: just the punchline, sorta at July 18, 2018 06:14 PM (Evws/)

157 Strangely, Iran has (or used to have the same "birthright citizenship" rule. I know someone -- a blonde girl of (ultimately) long-ago Danish ancestry whose father (a US citizen) use to captain an oil tanker back in the '60s. As acaptain he had the privilege of traveling with his wife if he so chose -- which he did. He brought his pregnant wife (also a US citizen) with him on one journey up the Strait of Hormuz, and during the trip she went into labor early. She was helivacced to a hospital in (Shah-era) Iran, whee she successfully gave birth to a preemie who survived, and grew up to be my friend.

As a result of all this, she had an Iranian birth certificate (with a name like "Katie Hanson" on it), and was automatically an Iranian citizen.

Not sure if that citizenship was revoked after 1979 or not -- but I suppose it was.

She used the birth certificate to game the Affirmative Action scholarship system, applying for and receiving scholarships reserved for "Iranian" and "foreign" students at various universities. Shameless, I know, but that was her personality.

Posted by: zombie at July 18, 2018 06:15 PM (c+2jX)

158 If I understand things correctly, an Article V Convention is different than a Constitutional Convention. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 06:06 PM (yJ9Jf)

You're right.
Article V means we dissolve everything. And I mean everything.
Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:09 PM (fiGNd)

--------------

Well, that certainly sounds particularly ungood.
Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 06:10 PM (yJ9Jf)

Depends. Do you think people should rule themselves ?

I think an Article V is the most Free thing a people can do. Even if they choose something worse than what they currently have.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:15 PM (fiGNd)

159
Not many countries in the entire world recognize birth rights
Posted by: Skip

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at July 18, 2018 06:15 PM (IqV8l)

160 Scogg, I know you disagree. Let's be blunt - Trump should only take this step on the day he's prepared to invoke martial law, throw all of Congress into a dungeon, abolish all the courts, and prepare to rule by decree from then on. I think we're winning bit by bit without having to go the Oliver Cromwell route yet.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:16 PM (k1TUh)

161 And Lufthansa doesn't let anyone past 8 months pregnant fly.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at July 18, 2018 06:14 PM (fuK7c)

I don't think most airlines let pregnant women fly after 7 months. I got stopped when I was 4 months pregnant. I explained that my due date was several months off. The stewardess said, "Oh - twins?"

No. Just one big fat baby.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 18, 2018 06:16 PM (lwiT4)

162 All restrictions against the dual citizenship of one who was a US Citizen by birth were found to be unconstitutional in 1965.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:13 PM (k1TUh)

But of course.

The Warren Court.

That's a time period that needs revisiting without a doubt.

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at July 18, 2018 06:16 PM (4ErVI)

163
Any amendments proposed in an Article V convention still require ratification by three-quarters of the states.

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at July 18, 2018 06:18 PM (CIRpK)

164 Earl Warren was even worse than John Roberts.

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at July 18, 2018 06:18 PM (UiRxW)

165 159 Thanks , was going to look for that but got side tracked

Posted by: Skip at July 18, 2018 06:18 PM (pHfeF)

166 I think an Article V is the most Free thing a people can do. Even if they choose something worse than what they currently have."

I don't oppose an Article V convention - but know that there is no way anything approaching a "United States" emerges from one. It would result in at least 3, and probably 5 or 6 successor states out of the remains of what had been the US. Since Greater Texas would probably be one of the most powerful, that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:19 PM (k1TUh)

167 Welcome back grammie.
Missed you,,, a bunch.

Posted by: teej at July 18, 2018 06:19 PM (Z7oqE)

168 You coulda' had me at Pinochet, Tom.

Here ... have this Yuengling Lite through the USB.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:19 PM (fiGNd)

169 After Trump is re-elected and the Congress goes larger Repub majority this is possible. Also do away with dual citizenship not for kids of parents of two citizenships but for adults by age 25. Pick one.
Posted by: Lester at July 18, 2018 06:14 PM (LfJIn)

---------------

A larger Repub majority, IMO, would be of no help whatsoever on immigration issues.

They have shown time and time again that they represent their pro illegal/immigrant donor class much more than their constituents on this issue.

Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 06:19 PM (yJ9Jf)

170 EM-EM-PEACH-FOADIE-FI-META-FOADI-FI-FOADIE-FI

Posted by: MaXinE WatERs roootz at July 18, 2018 06:19 PM (q177U)

171 Shameless, I know, but that was her personality.
-----
That bitch!

She stole my move!

Posted by: liz warren at July 18, 2018 06:20 PM (Evws/)

172 Aw, teej. Good to see you!

Posted by: grammie winger at July 18, 2018 06:20 PM (lwiT4)

173 No Tom, I think there has not been any case on illegal aliens and the 14th, the Kim Ark case was legal alien, and I dunno, THAT might have been a wildly lawless ruling in itself. As noted by someone above, the author of the amendment made it very clear during the legislative portion that the 14th was not meant to apply to foreigners, and the whole effort that resulted in the 14th arose specifically from the issue of freedmen, NOT foreigners.

Cannot think of another constitutional amendment involved in any controversy where there was such clear, specific, modern legislative history and intent on the very things at issue.

Of course Roberts, in his second disastrous O-care decision, added statutory construction to the casualty list, along with common sense and any American sensibility, which were devastated by his first ruling. So maybe now even the actual words of a constitutional amendment's author on the very topic at issue is .... simply not relevant.

Posted by: rhomboid at July 18, 2018 06:20 PM (QDnY+)

174 If your cousin has a baby while she is here, that baby is instantly "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" as currently defined in the Federal Code, and as such instantly becomes a full US Citizen. The mother doesn't, but the baby does.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:09 PM (k1TUh)
---
Lock that baby up!

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 06:20 PM (vDqXW)

175 There will be helicopter rides and many holes dug before any Article V happens.

Posted by: Mr Aspirin Factory at July 18, 2018 06:21 PM (89T5c)

176 We don't prosecute children. An infant is not subject to the jurisdiction of the US--its *parents* are.

It's silly to say that a baby is subject to on jurisdiction or another.

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 06:22 PM (vDqXW)

177 173. I'm sold!

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, SMR and Ancient Slavonaut Newsletters at July 18, 2018 06:22 PM (fA1SL)

178 So we don't deport them, we just make them outsiders forever? How is that sensible?

Posted by: ChrisBalsz at July 18, 2018 06:22 PM (K5qvX)

179 OT: I'm watching Mountains of the Moon, a flick about Speke and Burton's journey to find the source of the Nile. I haven't seen it in years.

Speke is played by Iain Glen (from Game of Thrones) and Patrick Bergin, who always plays crazy obsessives/obsessive crazies.

Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at July 18, 2018 06:22 PM (gUCYC)

180 She used the birth certificate to game the Affirmative Action scholarship system, applying for and receiving scholarships reserved for "Iranian" and "foreign" students at various universities. Shameless, I know, but that was her personality.
________________________

That's disgraceful! What kind of low-life would lie and scam and take advantage of AA to get into schools they probably weren't qualified for otherwise. I mean, the nerve of some people, claiming to be foreign for one purpose, and then claiming to be American for another. It's outrageous!

(And it works like a charm! Especially if you can get all your records sealed afterwards!)

Posted by: Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. at July 18, 2018 06:23 PM (fqUgw)

181 Patrick Bergin, who always plays crazy obsessives/obsessive crazies.
Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at July 18, 2018 06:22 PM (gUCYC)
----
I meant to add, "portrays Richard Burton (not that one).

Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at July 18, 2018 06:24 PM (gUCYC)

182 He brought his pregnant wife (also a US citizen) with him on one journey up the Strait of Hormuz ...
____

Yes, go on ...

Posted by: Shep Smith at July 18, 2018 06:24 PM (9IeEo)

183 My son's university required a class on either women, blacks or indians. He picked indians. Came out a big fan of Andrew Jackson. Probably not the result they were looking for. Has dogs named Andy and Jack(son).

Posted by: dagny at July 18, 2018 06:24 PM (nRWPy)

184 127
How can just being born here make you a citizen? That's stupid. Does any other country do that?

Posted by: f'd at July 18, 2018 06:02 PM (UdKB7)

Most of the countries that had birthright citizenship have repealed their laws that had this. The US and Canada are the only two developed countries left that have it.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at July 18, 2018 06:27 PM (mpXpK)

185 176 We don't prosecute children. An infant is not subject to the jurisdiction of the US--its *parents* are.

It's silly to say that a baby is subject to on jurisdiction or another."

Just to repost, those are not my words. That is the legal definition found in 31 CFR 515.329, and 515.330 , of the current Federal Code. Congress has the power to change those definitions, but until they do, that baby is "Subject to the Jurisdiction of" as a matter of Black Letter Law.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:27 PM (k1TUh)

186 Speke is played by Iain Glen (from Game of Thrones) and Patrick Bergin, who always plays crazy obsessives/obsessive crazies.
Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at July 18, 2018 06:22 PM (gUCYC)

I had a mad crush on Iain Glen for a while. Then aw him in his younger days, and he looked more like ET. Yikes! But as an older guy, I was drawn to him. I think his voice has a lot to do with it.

Is the movie good? Patrick Bergin is that guy from Sleeping with the Enemy iirc.

Posted by: platypus, gg channel at July 18, 2018 06:29 PM (CiCKR)

187 She used the birth certificate to game the Affirmative Action scholarship system, applying for and receiving scholarships reserved for "Iranian" and "foreign" students at various universities. Shameless, I know, but that was her personality.
Posted by: zombie at July 18, 2018 06:15 PM (c+2jX)

Now nobody of ambiguous citizenship would ever game the system to receive preferential treatment and scholarships. I have that on good authority.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara, now with a spark of divinity at July 18, 2018 06:29 PM (ez9Rh)

188 *saw

Dammit!

Posted by: platypus, gg channel at July 18, 2018 06:29 PM (CiCKR)

189 @146

Let's play this game...

A hostile force invades the US, among these hostile forces are pregnant woman, these pregnant woman have babies.

Are the progeny of these woman US citizens?

If you say yes you are silly.

The 14th Amendment has been abused to advance the marxist agenda for a very long time, see the SCOTUS reading equal dignity into it to justify gay marriage.

The 14th was adopted to rectify a very specific iniquity, the status of freed blacks, and does not apply to foreigners who just happen to drop a baby while on US soil.

Posted by: Kreplach at July 18, 2018 06:29 PM (UfMVm)

190 183 My son's university required a class on either women, blacks or indians. He picked indians. Came out a big fan of Andrew Jackson. Probably not the result they were looking for. Has dogs named Andy and Jack(son).
Posted by: dagny at July 18, 2018 06:24 PM (nRWPy)

The university should also have required women, blacks and Indians to take a class in physics as a graduation requirement.

A real one, not "physics for poets," or any of that shit.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara, now with a spark of divinity at July 18, 2018 06:30 PM (ez9Rh)

191 Black Letter Law.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:27 PM (k1TUh)

Tom ... I like you ... but shit like this is why I "go off" the way I do on Republicans.

Fuck Black Letter Law. Seriously.

If Black Letter Law says Jews must wear a Yellow Star ? I don't care. And I don't care how much about those that support the notion.

But I always say ... and a Certain Crowd here always howl ... if The Law says form a line for the gas chamber ... some folks will form lines.

Black Letter Law is damned over-rated, dude.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:31 PM (fiGNd)

192 Depends. Do you think people should rule themselves ?

I think an Article V is the most Free thing a people can do. Even if they choose something worse than what they currently have.
Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:15 PM (fiGNd)

-----------

Theoretically, I think that yeah, people should rule themselves. Realistically, when I look around at what the citizenry has become, the idea scares the shit out of me.

I know 2/3 of the states would need to vote to ratify, which is helpful. Bottom line is I really don't know enough about the process and possible range of results to have a good opinion.

Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 06:31 PM (yJ9Jf)

193 @188 See.

Posted by: SOMEASSHOLESTOLEMYPEN at July 18, 2018 06:32 PM (nQHw/)

194 Trump signing this executive order has about as much chance as him ordering all of the Hawaiian judges onto the helicopter.

Posted by: Kate Winslet's boobs at July 18, 2018 06:32 PM (klu83)

195 A hostile force invades the US, among these hostile forces are pregnant woman, these pregnant woman have babies."

Kreplach, think about what you wrote - you used the word "Hostile".

By definition, "hostile" invading forces are NOT subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Easy way to visualize this (although it's not a strictly legal definition) - if the police can drive out and arrest someone, then that someone is subject to the jurisdiction thereof. If the police can't, then they aren't.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:32 PM (k1TUh)

196 155 Is this a good time to bring up the Natural Born Citizen requirement for being eligible to become President?

personally, i'm all for keeping clones out of the white house.

Posted by: Anachronda at July 18, 2018 06:33 PM (xGZ+b)

197 DON'T. Don't do it, little wet noodle. Fanboy. Don't do it For The People.

Posted by: Former Gov. Schwarzenegger at July 18, 2018 06:33 PM (RfYYV)

198 Well let's not all get our panties in a bunch over splitting legal hairs.

We all agree on helicopter rides, right?

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at July 18, 2018 06:34 PM (4ErVI)

199 The 14th amendment was a remedy to freedmen, slaves, who were being denied Constitutional rights by the troglodyte Democrats of the south post Civil War. The fact that this has rolled into ILLEGAL aliens squirting out babies on one side of a boundary is truly, (apologies CNN) F***ing outrageous.

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at July 18, 2018 06:34 PM (ty7RM)

200 Earl Warren was even worse than John Roberts.

HANK HILL: I thought you were busy teaching girls to blow up basketballs. When did this turn into a desire to ruin wrestling?

PEGGY HILL: Oh, give me a break. I don't see how having a girl on the team would ruin it. Did a woman judge ruin the Supreme Court?

HANK HILL: Yes, and that woman's name was Earl Warren.

Posted by: bonhomme at July 18, 2018 06:34 PM (9qZ3S)

201 Well this is interesting. Remember how lots of people were freaking out last Friday when Rosenstein announced the Russian indictments saying he was trying to hamstring Trump before the Russian summit?

Turns out it was Trump not Rosenstein who chose to make the announcement before the summit believing it would give him a stronger hand with Putin. This matches up with Bolton making the same claim about the timing of the announcement.

https://tinyurl.com/ya7ekqcq

I hope some people didn't burn off all their hair over that one.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 18, 2018 06:34 PM (/tuJf)

202 The Interior Department's internal watchdog has opened a formal
investigation into a real estate deal involving a foundation established
by Ryan Zinke- Politico

The fever swamp is everywhere.

Posted by: Under Fire at July 18, 2018 06:34 PM (r9UYA)

203 Every Democrat and quite a few Republicans would vote against changing the natural birth law, and might require clarifying the constitution amendment

Posted by: Skip at July 18, 2018 06:35 PM (pHfeF)

204 @195
That's absurd.
A hostile would be subdued, arrested, imprisoned, and possibly tried and executed, but wouldn't be subject to the jurisdiction of the US?

You're being silly now.

Posted by: Kreplach at July 18, 2018 06:35 PM (UfMVm)

205 The way to sell it is to point out to blacks that their 14th Amendment is being used to replace them. Pretty simple.

Posted by: Puddin Head at July 18, 2018 06:35 PM (vV/gB)

206 But...but...Montenegro!!!

Posted by: Rancid French Dressing at July 18, 2018 06:35 PM (Tyii7)

207 if the police can drive out and arrest someone, then
that someone is subject to the jurisdiction thereof. If the police
can't, then they aren't.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:32 PM (k1TUh)

So how would that look in relation to very young children brought here by illegal alien parents? Are they subject to US jurisdiction?

Posted by: grammie winger at July 18, 2018 06:35 PM (lwiT4)

208 We all agree on helicopter rides, right?
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at July 18, 2018 06:34 PM (4ErVI)

No.

Posted by: Blimp and Airplane Manufacturers at July 18, 2018 06:35 PM (j6XEO)

209 Theoretically, I think that yeah, people should rule themselves. Realistically, when I look around at what the citizenry has become, the idea scares the shit out of me.

Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 06:31 PM (yJ9Jf)

Well ... if the Unwashed Masses can't rule themselves - who will rule them ?

And by Them ... are we Them or Us ?

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:36 PM (fiGNd)

210 Love the idea. Doubt this type of action is taken.

Build the wall. South first, then north.

Posted by: Nick in Tallahassee at July 18, 2018 06:36 PM (fYi9j)

211 I had a mad crush on Iain Glen for a while. Then aw him in his younger days, and he looked more like ET. Yikes! But as an older guy, I was drawn to him. I think his voice has a lot to do with it.

Is the movie good? Patrick Bergin is that guy from Sleeping with the Enemy iirc.
Posted by: platypus, gg channel at July 18, 2018 06:29 PM (CiCKR)
---
I think young, tender Iain is just fine, if you like pallid tweedy striplings! And yes, it's THAT Bergin. And I'm seeing lots of character actors if you enjoy playing Oh It's That Guy.

It's a very good flick, as I recall. Some horrific suffering along the way.

Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at July 18, 2018 06:36 PM (gUCYC)

212 I hope some people didn't burn off all their hair over that one.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 18, 2018 06:34 PM (/tuJf)

I lost half an eyebrow.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 18, 2018 06:37 PM (lwiT4)

213 I missed most of the last thread. Have we always been at war with Montenegro?

Posted by: rickl at July 18, 2018 06:37 PM (sdi6R)

214 And by Them ... are we Them or Us ?
Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:36 PM (fiGNd)

-------------

See the final sentence of my post.

Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 06:37 PM (yJ9Jf)

215 I hope some people didn't burn off all their hair over that one.

Heh. I think you already know the answer to that.

Posted by: Grey Fox at July 18, 2018 06:37 PM (bZ7mE)

216 We all agree on helicopter rides, right?

Hear, hear! This calls for a fare reduction!

Posted by: Pinochet Airlines at July 18, 2018 06:37 PM (Tyii7)

217 Well ... if the Unwashed Masses can't rule themselves - who will rule them ?

I would very much like to be Queen.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 18, 2018 06:37 PM (lwiT4)

218 208
We all agree on helicopter rides, right?

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at July 18, 2018 06:34 PM (4ErVI)

No.

Posted by: rocket Sled With No Brakes at July 18, 2018 06:38 PM (r9UYA)

219 So I see San Francisco has given Illegals the vote...They say they meaning illegals should have some say in their community and especially their childrens schools... Right... I volunteered many years here in NorCal in public schools and I can tell you they don't give a rats ass a bout the schools or community... they just dump the kids there... Never lift a fucking finger... They do however show up for any freebies that were offered...

Posted by: It's me donna at July 18, 2018 06:38 PM (O2RFr)

220 Germany can't even deport a trained al-Qaeda operative
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12723/germany-deportation-system

Posted by: Skip at July 18, 2018 06:38 PM (pHfeF)

221 I would very much like to be Queen.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 18, 2018 06:37 PM (lwiT4)

Sorry, position's filled.

Posted by: Barack Obama at July 18, 2018 06:39 PM (ez9Rh)

222 The university should also have required women, blacks and Indians to take a class in physics as a graduation requirement.

A real one, not "physics for poets," or any of that shit.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara, now with a spark of divinity at July 18, 2018 06:30 PM (ez9Rh)

---

Heh...

Posted by: SMH - Get right or get left at July 18, 2018 06:39 PM (gBShP)

223 Let's play a game. It is called "Pregnant Mexican Invaders".

Posted by: The Morontron 5000 at July 18, 2018 06:39 PM (Evws/)

224 >>>I hope some people didn't burn off all their hair over that one

Posted by: well it's too late, to turn back time at July 18, 2018 06:39 PM (BVthB)

225 The Interior Department's internal watchdog has opened a formal
investigation into a real estate deal involving a foundation established
by Ryan Zinke- Politico

The fever swamp is everywhere
============================
Help me understand this. Please.

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at July 18, 2018 06:39 PM (ty7RM)

226 Black Letter Law is damned over-rated, dude."

It isn't always right, or even moral - but as long as we have courts, that's a slam dunk on how any Court is going to rule. And when you think about it, it is the height of conservatism to hold that the Courts should actually follow the Law as written. It is the height of progressivism to say "Screw the law, lets do whatever we want."

There are always bad laws, and the current definition of citizenship may very well be one of those bad laws. But the answer to that is to use the legal structures we have to CHANGE those laws, not just throw out the entire concept of law altogether. Because whenever that has happened, it always turns out the same way.

If we can't attract enough support to get Congress to change the law, then there is no way we would ever get enough support to win the war that would start when we threw out all the laws.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:39 PM (k1TUh)

227 Turns out it was Trump not Rosenstein who chose to make the announcement before the summit believing it would give him a stronger hand with Putin. This matches up with Bolton making the same claim about the timing of the announcement.

https://tinyurl.com/ya7ekqcq

I hope some people didn't burn off all their hair over that one.
Posted by: JackStraw at July 18, 2018 06:34 PM (/tuJf)

I did opine the timing was perfect. However, not for these reasons, nor did I think Trump picked the timing. So I'm thinking I just get partial credit.

Posted by: platypus, gg channel at July 18, 2018 06:39 PM (CiCKR)

228 Most of the countries that had birthright citizenship have repealed their laws that had this. The US and Canada are the only two developed countries left that have it.
Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at July 18, 2018 06:27 PM (mpXpK)

I was stationed in England when I was pregnant with my son. Every morning, an official with the British government would phone the labor and delivery ward at the base hospital, asking how many babies had been born the day before. I was told it was so they could count them up as British "citizens" and tax the crap out of their parents. L and D staff were under strict orders not to give out the information.

Posted by: antisocialist at July 18, 2018 06:39 PM (9BwmK)

229 Nood-bring your reading glasses

Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 06:39 PM (yJ9Jf)

230 The fever swamp is everywhere
============================
Help me understand this. Please.

Easy, he worked in some capacity for Trump

Posted by: It's me donna at July 18, 2018 06:39 PM (O2RFr)

231 Nood.

Movie review length.

Posted by: Furious George at July 18, 2018 06:40 PM (9vQJW)

232 218 208
We all agree on helicopter rides, right?

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at July 18, 2018 06:34 PM (4ErVI)

No.

Posted by: rocket Sled With No Brakes at July 18, 2018 06:38 PM (r9UYA)

Same here.

Posted by: Trebuchet Manufacturers Association at July 18, 2018 06:40 PM (ez9Rh)

233 See the final sentence of my post.
Posted by: Calm Mentor at July 18, 2018 06:37 PM (yJ9Jf)

Bottom line is I really don't know enough about the process and possible range of results to have a good opinion.

That is honest as the day is long. And I don't either. But props to you for sayin' it.

I'm just not worried about an Article V breaking up the map. Mostly because I think the map's too big to begin with.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:40 PM (fiGNd)

234 100,000s illegals voted in the last election, who had more interference in the election Mexico or Russia?

Posted by: Skip at July 18, 2018 06:41 PM (pHfeF)

235
Well ... if the Unwashed Masses can't rule themselves - who will rule them ?

One ring

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at July 18, 2018 06:41 PM (IqV8l)

236 By definition, "hostile" invading forces are NOT
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Easy way to
visualize this (although it's not a strictly legal definition) - if the
police can drive out and arrest someone, then that someone is subject
to the jurisdiction thereof. If the police can't, then they aren't.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:32 PM (k1TUh)

---
the military takes hostile prisoners all the time. what US jurisdiction are they subject to?

wanna try a different line of argument?

Posted by: redc1c4 at July 18, 2018 06:41 PM (uS008)

237 Love the idea. Doubt this type of action is taken.

Build the wall. South first, then north.
Posted by: Nick in Tallahassee

And one on the Atlantic. Just to see if any of the hair on fire crowd will make a connection with a rudimentary knowledge of history.

Posted by: X-ray at July 18, 2018 06:42 PM (YdakM)

238 If you want to change some politicians' minds about open borders, I'm going to need their addresses, 200 pregnant Mexican women, and a taco launcher.

Posted by: Cartman from Southpark at July 18, 2018 06:42 PM (klu83)

239
100,000s illegals voted in the last election, who had more interference in the election Mexico or Russia?
Posted by: Skip

Tucker's guest last night said you have a greater chance of being hit by lightning than of an illegal voting.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at July 18, 2018 06:42 PM (IqV8l)

240 NOOD.

Posted by: Basement Cat at July 18, 2018 06:43 PM (3C9q2)

241 The comment section at the Washington Post id as expected. Fact-free assertions and lots of self-righteous anger.

Posted by: Semi-Literate Thug at July 18, 2018 06:43 PM (ritOW)

242 And when you think about it, it is the height of conservatism to hold that the Courts should actually follow the Law as written. It is the height of progressivism to say "Screw the law, lets do whatever we want."

Then call me whatever Tom. I'm way past the point of caring. I'm the cat that hates titles anyway.

You obey the Court ... you're vested in the process. Me ? I don't give a damn anymore.

The Court is rigged. Fuck playing a rigged game.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:44 PM (fiGNd)

243 So how would that look in relation to very young children brought here by illegal alien parents? Are they subject to US jurisdiction?"

Of course they're subject to the jurisdiction, which is why they are being detained - the issue that's being fought about right now is, can they be detained separately or must they be held together with their parents? And, if they are held together, how long can the government hold them before there is a hearing to determine their status? And if the Government is not capable of holding a hearing within what the court feels is a reasonable time, then is the government obligated to release them until such time as it can hold a hearing? Those are the topics that are actually being argued in the district court fights over the border that you hear snippets of.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:45 PM (k1TUh)

244 238 If you want to change some politicians' minds about open borders, I'm going to need their addresses, 200 pregnant Mexican women, and a taco launcher.
Posted by: Cartman from Southpark at July 18, 2018 06:42 PM

I, am Mantequilla, the last of the Meheecans.

Posted by: Butters at July 18, 2018 06:47 PM (CiCKR)

245 You obey the Court ... you're vested in the process."

Getting a law degree does tend to do that to oneself.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:48 PM (k1TUh)

246 101 CFR is the Code of Federal Regulations. They are not laws.

Posted by: mercenary13 at July 18, 2018 06:49 PM (zK4M1)

247 Tucker's guest last night said you have a greater chance of being hit by lightning than of an illegal voting.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at July 18, 2018 06:42 PM (IqV8l)

Maybe on Mars. But on Earth, illegal voting > hit by lightening.

Posted by: Zombie Albert Einstein at July 18, 2018 06:51 PM (CiCKR)

248 The kids are held because they can't just make them disappear and they're a logistical issue. They've got kids left without parents showing up on their doorstep.

We don't even treat them as if *they've* broken our laws--because in general, they didn't.

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 06:51 PM (vDqXW)

249 if as foreigner is here and can't be drafted into the military, he is not "subject" to our jursidiction, even if we don't allow him to run around murdering people 9or otherwise breaking laws). yet his home country has jurisdiction, they COULD draft him, because he is their SUBJECT.

that's my interpretation. illegals prove just by their presence, that they have not been subjected to our laws. In any case, congress could pass a law (or clarification, whatever) and we could see what SCOTUS would do with it. It would be a good thing to campaign on ...

Posted by: illiniwek at July 18, 2018 06:52 PM (bT8Z4)

250 Getting a law degree does tend to do that to oneself.

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 18, 2018 06:48 PM (k1TUh)

I knew that without you tellin' ... you know way too much about the process otherwise.

And hey ... we're just talkin'. I don't think any less of ya'. I hope you understand that.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 18, 2018 06:54 PM (fiGNd)

251 Howard assured skeptics that "Indians born within the limits of the United States, and who maintain their tribal relations, are not, in the sense of this amendment, born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States."

Yet, I bet you we can still take them to our courts if they kill in American towns.

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 06:54 PM (vDqXW)

252 Senator Lyman Trumbull, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, supported Howard, contending that “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” meant “not owing allegiance to anybody else . . . subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States.” Indians, he concluded, were not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States because they owed allegiance—even if only partial allegiance—to their tribes. Thus, two requirements were set for United States citizenship: born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction.

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 06:58 PM (vDqXW)

253 Michael Anton is wrong, both historically and Constitutionally. Within the common law, citizenship at birth (or being a subject at birth) was automatic if one were born in the country, the country actually had jurisdiction to impose its laws (e.g. excluding ambassadors and occupied territories), and legiance by the parents, whereby the parents agree to live by the laws of the land; the 14th Amendment dropped the last requirement.

By declaring that children of noncitizens are not citizens, you put them out of reach of all United States law. For example, a child of a noncitizen would be able to commit crimes with impunity because the government has no jurisdiction over them since they are not subject to it. It would give them the same status as an ambassador. Being fully and completely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States does not exclude others from claiming jurisdiction, and any such claims of jurisdiction do not and can not negate the jurisdiction of the United States.

As to the debate, if they meant for the Amendment to be exclusive of foreign citizens, like the 1866 naturalization act was, then they should have used the language of the act. Plenty of others indicated during the debate over the 14th Amendment, and contemporaneously, that it was inclusive of those born domestically, with the author of the citizenship clause explicitly stating: "This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons." (See: http://preview.tinyurl.com/3kgp4jw)

The pure fact of the matter is that the Amendment says what it says. "Jurisdiction" has well established usage.

See: http://preview.tinyurl.com/p7pz5v2

Some may point out that some of the authors of the 14th Amendment meant it to mean under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States as mentioned in the contemporary naturalization act. But that act explicitly mentioned not "jurisdiction" but being "not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States". The two are not interchangeable in any way shape or form. Two Supreme Court cases mentioned on passing some echo of this idea, but since the 14th Amendment did not define a new definition or type of "jurisdiction", but such dicta do not create law ex nihilo. A person in the incorporated territory and fully subject to the law thereof is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, with limited and explicit exeptions, regardless of if they are citizen, legal alien, or illegal alien.

Ironically if we use the "not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States" definition, than a child of illegal immigrants (each from a country that requires both citizens to be parent to inherent citizenship), would be a citizen at birth, while a child born of an American citizen and another parent even one split second before acquiring citizenship is not a citizen but a foreigner to be treated as such.

Jurisdiction refers not to allegiance, but to obedience.

Posted by: The Natural Born Hat at July 18, 2018 07:01 PM (itfg0)

254 That's inane because:
---
In Elk v. Wilkins (1884), the Supreme Court decided that a native Indian who had renounced allegiance to his tribe did not become “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States by virtue of the renunciation. “The alien and dependent condition of the members of the Indian Tribes could not be put off at their own will, without the action or assent of the United States” signified either by treaty or legislation. Neither the “Indian Tribes” nor “individual members of those Tribes,” no more than “other foreigners” can “become citizens of their own will.”

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 07:08 PM (vDqXW)

255 200 Earl Warren was even worse than John Roberts.

HANK HILL: I thought you were busy teaching girls to blow up basketballs. When did this turn into a desire to ruin wrestling?

PEGGY HILL: Oh, give me a break. I don't see how having a girl on the team would ruin it. Did a woman judge ruin the Supreme Court?

HANK HILL: Yes, and that woman's name was Earl Warren.
Posted by: bonhomme at July 18, 2018 06:34 PM (9qZ3S)

I was JUST going to quote that!

:fist-bump:

Posted by: josephistan at July 18, 2018 07:12 PM (Izzlo)

256 252 Senator Lyman Trumbull, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, supported Howard, contending that "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" meant "not owing allegiance to anybody else . . . subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States." Indians, he concluded, were not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States because they owed allegiance--even if only partial allegiance--to their tribes. Thus, two requirements were set for United States citizenship: born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction.

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 06:58 PM (vDqXW)

Indians were explicitly excluded, where Indian nations were recognized as a nation within a nation. Sen. Trumbell also said:

"I have already said that in my opinion birth entitles a person to citizenship, that every free-born person in this land is, by virtue of being born here, a citizen of the United States."

http://preview.tinyurl.com/j5qnrg3

It is also of note that Sen. Cowan, who voted against the 14th Amendment, believed that it would grant citizen ship to those who "owe [the U.S.] no allegiance [and] who predent to owe none" inclusive of those who regularly commit "trespass" within the U.S..

Posted by: The Natural Born Hat at July 18, 2018 07:16 PM (itfg0)

257 In Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment (199

the court said “jurisdiction is a word of many, too many, meanings.” Therefore, it is important to discover the operational meaning behind “subject to the jurisdiction” as employed under the Fourteenth Amendment rather than assuming its meaning from other usages of the word jurisdiction alone. Both Sen. Trumbull and Sen. Howard provide the answer, with Trumbull declaring:

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 07:18 PM (vDqXW)

258 Sen. Howard places this earlier comment of his on who is “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” into proper context: “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.”

What Sen. Howard is saying here is citizenship 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.

Sen. Trumbull further restates the goal of the language: “It is only those persons who come completely within our jurisdiction, who are subject to our laws, that we think of making citizens…” Note that Trumbull does not say temporarily within our jurisdiction, but “completely within our jurisdiction”.

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 07:23 PM (vDqXW)

259 254 That's inane because:
---
In Elk v. Wilkins (1884), the Supreme Court decided that a native Indian who had renounced allegiance to his tribe did not become "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States by virtue of the renunciation. "The alien and dependent condition of the members of the Indian Tribes could not be put off at their own will, without the action or assent of the United States" signified either by treaty or legislation. Neither the "Indian Tribes" nor "individual members of those Tribes," no more than "other foreigners" can "become citizens of their own will."

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 07:08 PM (vDqXW)

Referring to naturalization, and not status at birth.

Posted by: The Natural Born Hat at July 18, 2018 07:24 PM (itfg0)

260 What Sen. Howard is saying here is citizenship 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.

Sen. Trumbull further restates the goal of the language: "It is only those persons who come completely within our jurisdiction, who are subject to our laws, that we think of making citizens..." Note that Trumbull does not say temporarily within our jurisdiction, but "completely within our jurisdiction".

Posted by: Axeman at July 18, 2018 07:23 PM (vDqXW)

It excluded those were were ministers or similarly excluded, but explicitly included all other classes.

Posted by: The Natural Born Hat at July 18, 2018 07:26 PM (itfg0)

261 Having the federal government pick and choose what native-born resident is a citizen will work about as well as letting them pick and choose what grassroots organization get tax-exempt status, and for the same reasons.

Posted by: ChrisBalsz at July 18, 2018 07:40 PM (K5qvX)

262 If illegal aliens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S., then it means we have no authority to try them for crimes.

Just as with people who want to legislate the "repeal" of the 2nd Amendment and the refrain is "then amend the Constitution", if you want to end jus soli (birthright citizenship), then amend the Constitution.
Any legislative "remedy" would be just as outrageous as attempts by socialists and their ilk to redact the Constitution.

Posted by: Sam at July 18, 2018 07:43 PM (ZIHuF)

263 Show this Daily Beast article to Democrats.

We will get Birth Right Citizenship ended immediately!

Russians Flock to Trump Properties to Give Birth to U.S. Citizens http://thebea.st/2gIxhyj

#RussiaRussiaRussia #OMG #Ruskies

Posted by: Trigger Warning at July 18, 2018 07:45 PM (YRXy3)

264 Robert Heinlein had it correct, citizenship and the right to vote need to be earned.

Do you want to know more?

Posted by: deepred at July 18, 2018 09:14 PM (AfBox)

265 Starship Troopers. If you don't serve, you're not a citizen.

Posted by: RobertM at July 18, 2018 09:46 PM (H2FoK)

266 The problem is that the explicit and unambiguous language of the 14th Amendment does not distinguish between the child of citizens of the United born in the United States, and the child of non-citizens of the United States born in the United States. Both are persons "born in the United States". The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" excludes children of persons enjoying diplomatic status, which exempts them from the jurisdiction of the United States. Illegal aliens are subject to US jurisdiction as much as citizens; so are any children born to them.

If birthright citizenship is to be ended (or more precisely, restricted), that will require amending the Constitution.

Mind you, there are ways it can be prevented administratively. During WW II, a Dutch royal princess had a baby while living in Canada. The child would have been excluded from the succession under Dutch law, as born outside the Netherlands. So the delivery room of the hospital was declared an annex of the Dutch embassy.

The US could do something similar. Whenever a non-resident alien mother gives birth, declare the delivery room an annex of the home country embassy. It could be done in 30 seconds electronically. (If the home country won't cooperate, some African ----hole country will, for a fee. The kid can be a citizen of Malawi or Burkina Faso.)

Posted by: Rich Rostrom at July 20, 2018 01:03 AM (bT9ZN)

Processing 0.03, elapsed 0.0364 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0138 seconds, 275 records returned.
Page size 155 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.