Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TheThinker
The Supreme Court might do something about anchor babies if the the right lawsuit makes it that far...

But how? The SC is only there to interpret the constitution and the language in the 14th amendment is very clear. Quite frankly, though I do not like outcome/consequence of the verbiage in the 14th amendment, I do not want a court that can willy-nilly find a way to interpret the meaning of that particular amendment in any other manner. In my view, the only sensible thing to do is to try and amend the 14th amendment by adding some key words -- key words that are carefully written so as to avoid other consequences.

14 posted on 10/26/2007 7:45:29 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe (I'm a Paleo-liberal: I believe in freedom; am socially independent and a borderline fiscal anarchist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: LowCountryJoe

But, it was a Democrat that inserted the language “not under the jurisdiction of a foreign nation” or the equivalent that was supposed to keep illegals from gaining automatic citizenship.


23 posted on 10/26/2007 7:00:33 PM PDT by TheThinker (Foreign campaign contributions should be criminal. This is not democracy at work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson