Trump's border czar doesn't believe birthright citizenship is enshrined in Constitution

[moe]

In MAGAWorld you just deny reality and say whatever feels good, no big deal.

Trump's border czar doesn't believe birthright citizenship is enshrined in Constitution

“I kind of disagree with you, I don't think it's enshrined in the Constitution at all – not the way I read it,” Homan replied. “But then again, I’m not a constitutional scholar. We’ll let the courts decide that on the birthright citizenship.”

Homan added that birthright citizenship is “a major magnet for illegal immigration” and that the United States has to “stop rewarding illegal behavior.”

“Yeah, of course it's the 14th amendment, as you know,” Collins said before moving on to her next question.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

In MAGAWorld you just deny reality and say whatever feels good, no big deal.

Trump's border czar doesn't believe birthright citizenship is enshrined in Constitution

“I kind of disagree with you, I don't think it's enshrined in the Constitution at all – not the way I read it,” Homan replied. “But then again, I’m not a constitutional scholar. We’ll let the courts decide that on the birthright citizenship.”

Homan added that birthright citizenship is “a major magnet for illegal immigration” and that the United States has to “stop rewarding illegal behavior.”

“Yeah, of course it's the 14th amendment, as you know,” Collins said before moving on to her next question.

Apparently context isn’t something the left understands. Birthright citizenship was never intended to be how it’s being used right now. It was intended to address children of slaves. It was not intended to create a market for illegal immigration and anchor babies. It’s being abused.

A simple clarification to the amendment to address the currently underlying issues is long overdue and needed. And to be clear, the 14th is an amendment to the Constitution that can be adjusted, much like it was added long after the constitution was ratified. The 14th was not part of the original drafting, as you know.

 

[Gunny46]

It's a trojan horse used like the one on Moe's computer. Going to take some specialized skill to catch it and put a stop to it.

 

[WVUALLEN]

Hey moe. Trump is president, quit crying.

 

[Airport]

Apparently context isn’t something the left understands. Birthright citizenship was never intended to be how it’s being used right now. It was intended to address children of slaves. It was not intended to create a market for illegal immigration and anchor babies. It’s being abused.

A simple clarification to the amendment to address the currently underlying issues is long overdue and needed. And to be clear, the 14th is an amendment to the Constitution that can be adjusted, much like it was added long after the constitution was ratified. The 14th was not part of the original drafting, as you know.

Moe and the dems are just plain stupid and anti-american. Please, somebody challenge it. It's as you say, set up for the slave's children.

 

[Gunny46]

Moe and the dems are just plain stupid and anti-american. Please, somebody challenge it. It's as you say, set up for the slave's children.

Human Trafficking and the sexual exploitation of women/ children isn't a laughing matter. Moe needs to get on the right side of history on this.

 

[MountaineerWV]

So are we now Strict Constructionists or Loose Constructionists? I lose track with the arguments when it comes to the Constitution. It's either "well it doesn't say it" or "it didn't intend to mean this" or "it plainly says it". Will you all make up your minds. Thanks.

 

[WVUALLEN]

In MAGAWorld you just deny reality and say whatever feels good, no big deal.

Trump's border czar doesn't believe birthright citizenship is enshrined in Constitution

“I kind of disagree with you, I don't think it's enshrined in the Constitution at all – not the way I read it,” Homan replied. “But then again, I’m not a constitutional scholar. We’ll let the courts decide that on the birthright citizenship.”

Homan added that birthright citizenship is “a major magnet for illegal immigration” and that the United States has to “stop rewarding illegal behavior.”

“Yeah, of course it's the 14th amendment, as you know,” Collins said before moving on to her next question.

14th amendment was clearly intended to stop state governments from discriminating against Black Americans, and over the years would play a key role in many landmark civil rights cases.

14th Amendment: Simplified Summary, Text & Impact | HISTORY

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1868, granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States—including former slaves—and guaranteed all citizens “equal protection of the laws.”

www.history.com

The court’s interpretation of the 14th Amendment as extending to the children of legal, noncitizens was incorrect, according to the text and legislative history of the amendment. But even under that holding, citizenship was not extended to the children of illegal aliens—only permanent, legal residents.

It is just plain wrong to claim that the children born of parents temporarily in the country as students or tourists are automatically U.S. citizens: They do not meet the 14th Amendment’s jurisdictional allegiance obligations. They are, in fact, subject to the political jurisdiction (and allegiance) of the country of their parents. The same applies to the children of illegal aliens because children born in the United States to foreign citizens are citizens of their parents’ home country.

Birthright Citizenship: A Fundamental Misunderstanding of the 14th Amendment

What’s the citizenship status of the children of illegal aliens? That question has spurred quite a debate over the 14th Amendment lately, with the news that several states—including Pennsylvania, Arizona, Oklahoma, Georgia, and South Carolina—may launch efforts to deny automatic citizenship to...

www.heritage.org

 

[Gunny46]

So are we now Strict Constructionists or Loose Constructionists? I lose track with the arguments when it comes to the Constitution. It's either "well it doesn't say it" or "it didn't intend to mean this" or "it plainly says it". Will you all make up your minds. Thanks.

Human Traffickers are exploiting the laws so they can exploit the women and children. The law can handled in courts going forward. Until then nobody will be slowing down to stop the Human Traffickers and their customers in the incoming Administration. That will be much better than spending time on Jan 6 protesters and those people like them.

 

[MountaineerWV]

14th amendment was clearly intended to stop state governments from discriminating against Black Americans, and over the years would play a key role in many landmark civil rights cases.

14th Amendment: Simplified Summary, Text & Impact | HISTORY

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1868, granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States—including former slaves—and guaranteed all citizens “equal protection of the laws.”

www.history.com

The court’s interpretation of the 14th Amendment as extending to the children of legal, noncitizens was incorrect, according to the text and legislative history of the amendment. But even under that holding, citizenship was not extended to the children of illegal aliens—only permanent, legal residents.

It is just plain wrong to claim that the children born of parents temporarily in the country as students or tourists are automatically U.S. citizens: They do not meet the 14th Amendment’s jurisdictional allegiance obligations. They are, in fact, subject to the political jurisdiction (and allegiance) of the country of their parents. The same applies to the children of illegal aliens because children born in the United States to foreign citizens are citizens of their parents’ home country.

Birthright Citizenship: A Fundamental Misunderstanding of the 14th Amendment

What’s the citizenship status of the children of illegal aliens? That question has spurred quite a debate over the 14th Amendment lately, with the news that several states—including Pennsylvania, Arizona, Oklahoma, Georgia, and South Carolina—may launch efforts to deny automatic citizenship to...

www.heritage.org

Ok, not arguing that you are wrong, but using this argument couldn't anti-gun advocates make the same claim that it was "clear" that the Founding Father's meant muskets?

 

[Gunny46]

Ok, not arguing that you are wrong, but using this argument couldn't anti-gun advocates make the same claim that it was "clear" that the Founding Father's meant muskets?

They do and they are WRONG.

 

[MountaineerWV]

They do and they are WRONG.

Elaborate.

 

[Gunny46]

Elaborate.

It was a beautiful and profound statement. Ernest Hemingway would have been proud. George Washington would have loved it too.

 

[MountaineerWV]

It was a beautiful and profound statement. Ernest Hemingway would have been proud. George Washington would have loved it too.

Ok. Wow. Didn't know you would throw so much credit behind the writings and approval of a communist.

 

[Gunny46]

Ok. Wow. Didn't know you would throw so much credit behind the writings and approval of a communist.

I didn't say I was a fan but denying he's not a very popular historical writer seems petty. I was confident you liked him so that's why I used him.

 

[MountaineerWV]

I didn't say I was a fan but denying he's not a very popular historical writer seems petty. I was confident you liked him so that's why I used him.

I know. You got caught.

 

[Gunny46]

I know. You got caught.

Yes I got caught using someone that a Socialist sympathizer like you would like? Great job Sherlock.

 

[Airport]

So are we now Strict Constructionists or Loose Constructionists? I lose track with the arguments when it comes to the Constitution. It's either "well it doesn't say it" or "it didn't intend to mean this" or "it plainly says it". Will you all make up your minds. Thanks.

It is what it says and meant. I'd be happy if this court would interpret what it meant. Of course, K Brown doesn't even know what a woman is, so I'm not sure she's qualified.

 

[Brushy Bill]

So are we now Strict Constructionists or Loose Constructionists? I lose track with the arguments when it comes to the Constitution. It's either "well it doesn't say it" or "it didn't intend to mean this" or "it plainly says it". Will you all make up your minds. Thanks.

Constitutional restraint is useless against Progressive Communists like yourself.

 

[MountaineerWV]

Constitutional restraint is useless against Progressive Communists like yourself.

 

[WVUALLEN]

Ok, not arguing that you are wrong, but using this argument couldn't anti-gun advocates make the same claim that it was "clear" that the Founding Father's meant muskets?

That's not an arguement that's the 14th amendment.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

So are we now Strict Constructionists or Loose Constructionists? I lose track with the arguments when it comes to the Constitution. It's either "well it doesn't say it" or "it didn't intend to mean this" or "it plainly says it". Will you all make up your minds. Thanks.

Well, considering the 14th wasn’t an original and was added about 80 years later, and its intent known very well, I don’t think it’s a stretch to have a conversation about it, especially in light of the billion dollar industry human trafficking has become to the cartel and the massive damage it’s doing to the US.

Whereas your anti-gun argument was an original, and it’s clear in the federalist papers the intent without need mention of technological advantages. Moreover, the anti-gun argument of trying to constrain to a militia would negate the argument to limit tech. After all, we don’t want a militia to have to fight the Russians using flint lock. So, naturally, no need for the specificity the anti-gun people use. They just get trapped by logic at every turn. If they were just honest and said they’re afraid of guns, we could at least have an honest conversation about their fears.

And at this point, the anti-gun side has lost so much ground, I’m starting to not even worry about them any more. Trump has indicated a plan to have unfettered reciprocity while some within the cabinet have mentioned full constitutional carry. The anti-gun side is getting its ass kicked.

 

[phillya]

14th Amendment:
Persons born in the United States
AND SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF are citizens.

Ergo, no birthright citizenship.