The Meaning of US Citizenship

In recent years, the concept of U.S. citizenship has figured in public debate largely in connection with immigration reform. Should immigrants who are in the country illegally be given a "path to citizenship"? Should children born to parents who are not here legally be entitled to "birthright citizenship"?

” Should immigrants who are in the country illegally be given a “path to citizenship”?”

No.

“Should children born to parents who are not here legally be entitled to “birthright citizenship”?

H$LL No.

Yes, it is true that everyone within the territory of the United states, is to some extent, “subject to the jurisdiction thereof;” otherwise illegals - those with no standing to be here in the first place - could commit all kinds of mayhem: murder, rape, arson, and be beyond the reach of our laws. But that isn’t what that clause was all about, and never was; it was meant to convey that the individual was “solely and uniquely subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” and not subject to the jurisdiction of any other country or political entity. Like Mexico, and if there might be any question about this, Mexico routinely issues their “matricula consulars” to their citizens in the United States, clearly indicating some level of jurisdiction over their own citizens abroad.

Admittedly courts have been all over the place on this language in the 14th, and there have been some very badly bungled cases, but I think that there is adequate legal scholarship to conclude that even at the time, the correct interpretation was as I have put it. That certainly was the position of the primary author of the 14th. I will have to dig out the reference for you.

The "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" phrase was not some new formulation, it was simply a reference to the two ancient common law exceptions for jus solis

Wong Kim Ark was wrong and should be rejected if that is the interpretation which John Eastman and Ed Meese so eloquently showed in their Amicus brief to the court in Hamdi.

Territorial jurisidiction is not the same as political jurisdiction. The nationals of another nation are not part of our political nation. Thus their children are born inheriting their parents nationality, just as any American kid would have if he were born in another country to American parents...like Ted Cruz.

And Jus Soli as interpreted is a by product of English feudalism, and intended to make slaves of anyone unfortunate enough to have been born in land under control of the English kings. We reject English Common Law as it codifies serfdom.

PS: The question of birthright citizenship for the children of illegals has never been litigated before the Supreme Court. And it doesn't take an amendment to clarify it, Congress has that power and multiple bills have been introduced to do just that, but all have been killed by the Rats and Rinos.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.