Those of you who are saying that you don’t think the 14th Amendment needs to be changed, are probably each thinking that it was never intended to grant illegal alien children citizenship. I agree.
So when you object to having it changed, I understand.
Do you think that’s why Fiorina disagrees with changing it?
Don’t kid yourself. She disagrees with changing it because she doesn’t object to illegal alien children being granted U. S. citizenship.
As for the 14th being interpreted correctly, I think that cat is out of the bag. It’s probably going to take some sort of corrective measure to the actual verbiage itself to get this fixed. I believe the court has ruled on it before.
Perhaps a review would end favorably. I’m not sure.
Whatever it takes, within reason, this needs to be fixed.
I do not want a Constitution Convention to be called. It would open a can of worms I never want to see opened.
I'm with you, D1. I liked your analysis. I was feeling bad about seeming to side with Fiorino, but I believe that you nailed it on her reasons.
Have a great afternoon!
” Do you think that’s why Fiorina disagrees with changing it?
Don’t kid yourself. She disagrees with changing it because she doesn’t object to illegal alien children being granted U. S. citizenship. “
McCain’s little girl.