The Justices of the Supreme Court do not live in a bubble. This is the perfect time to set the record straight on Natural Born Citizen, especially when we have millions of anchor babies from all over the world being born here.
And for the record, from everything I have read, it is my interpretation that there is no such thing as an anchor baby. Reading the Federalist papers, with regard to the 14th Amendment, I think it is pretty clear, that “Under the Jurisdiction of” means, the country to which you have your allegiance, not your physical presence.
They did NOT want to follow the same Natural Law that Great Britian had to make subjects of people against their will. The British used Natural Law to strengthen their empire, we were not about being an empire.
“This is the perfect time to set the record straight on Natural Born Citizen”
I completely agree with that. This would be the perfect opportunity to outline that such a fact must be demonstrated prior to the election, how it should be demonstrated, to whom it must be demonstrated, and it would be the perfect time to expand the class of persons who have standing to challenge a candidate’s qualifications.
Even if they found it did not apply for this election (which it of course should apply to) then at least to give a framework for future elections.
bttt
And for the record, from everything I have read, it is my interpretation that there is no such thing as an anchor baby. Reading the Federalist papers, with regard to the 14th Amendment, I think it is pretty clear, that “Under the Jurisdiction of” means, the country to which you have your allegiance, not your physical presence.
They did NOT want to follow the same Natural Law that Great Britian had to make subjects of people against their will. The British used Natural Law to strengthen their empire, we were not about being an empire.
I am normally loathe to respond to posts more than a day old, but yours is emblematic of the sheer ignorance that has been on parade here on FR almost daily in connection this whole "certifigate" non-matter.
To begin with, it is not as if the "natural born citizen" issue has been arising with such regularity so as to compel the Supreme Court to tackle the issue. The Court, like all courts, will always avoid deciding issues on constitutional grounds if it can. And these "birth certificate" cases, which have all been brought by either kooks or highly marginalized ideologues (or both), are quite easily disposed of under the Court's well-established standing precedent before one even begins to gain sight of the so-called merits of the case. Hence, they will to a one all be flushed. Anyone who says otherwise is either stupid, a fool, or ignorant.
Second, what you refer to as an "anchor baby" is someone who is clearly eligible to be President. A person born in the United States is a U.S. citizen, regardless of the citizenship status of their parents. The exception would be the children of diplomats because diplomats are not "subject to the jurisidiction" of the United States -- which is what the 14th Amendment is referring to.
Finally, the fact that you refer to "[r]eading the Federalist papers, with regard to the 14th Amendment," shows that your post has no basis in reality whatsoever. The Federalist Papers were written 80 years before the Fourteenth Amendment was proposed and ratified.
FR used to be like going to a pleasant bar and having a nice drink with a bunch of amiable folks. Sure, there is the occasional drunken lout, but that mattered little, because you could have a good time and chat in depth with friends. With this whole birth certificate lunacy, however, it's been like going to a bench in some dreary pocket park downtown and sharing a bottle of Night Train in a paper bag with a bunch of crazed winos.