NO
NO
Only to those born of US parentage
And former slaves
Auto citizenship was never intended for non us citizens. The original text says specifically that it does not apply to non citizens. Unfortunately with Roberts sitting there we don’t dare challenge it. The guy is a disaster
Of course not!
Either way this implies the importance as to who you let into our country.
Still looking for yoo
No! That is the short answer and the long answer.
Well, that stinks!
What does the debate between Eastman and Yoo tell us? Mainly that the issue remains uncertain, and no court has ruled directly on the issue to help clarify it.
There is no consensus on this issue even at this site much less throughout the country. It’s not so much a left-right thing and depends on one’s understanding and interpretation of the Constitution. A case for the Supremes.
No they aren’t Citizens.
It is a scam foisted on America. A simple reading of the author of the 14th Amendment makes this very clear to anyone with basic reading comprehension.
It is not debateable in any way.
No, Federal law does.
Hi.
The way I see it is if both parents are non citizens then the jurisdiction of the child is whatever the parent is under.
For example a Japanese diplomat has a kid in Seattle.
That’s the first paragraph of the 14th Amendment.
If one parent is a citizen, then the child is a U.S. citizen by birth.
Imho.
5.56mm
Current federal law: 8 U.S.C. § 1401
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person
(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or
(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/8/12/III/I/1401
...what the Constitution requires... (IMO as well) ought to be controlling given we are a nation of laws.
...what the law ought to be... (IMO as well) is left by the Constitution itself for the legislative branch.
The Founders acknowledged and made exception for the fact there would be no NBC presidential candidates at the beginning, but rather only after the nation's formation had matured. The Constitution clearly, specifically and expressly provided for an initial period of time during which the nation could grow NBC citizens for the purpose of presidential qualification.
There is nothing in the Constitution that supports finding the child of a non-citizen is a NBC.
Get it in front of the Supreme Court and settle it once and for all. Until then this is meaningless. Just his opinion.
If they are not subject to our laws then how can we arrest them for being here illegally?
I won’t get into the debate about foreigners legally present although I don’t believe they should qualify.
What is absolutely clear is that Illegal Aliens are invaders and invaders do NOT qualify.
Saving to read all later! Have to go to bed.
No.