John / Billybob
I’m getting a Google Virus Warning when visiting your site. You may want to check it out.
Krauthammer practiced ready, fire, aim.
He is generally more on point than this, at least compared to most of the MSM. His handicaps may have given him an advantage over the “reporters” from the “three blind mice”, Commie News, PBS and MSNBC. And certainly better than the AP (Always Propaganda) writers.
Thanks for your perspective and good observations.
IMO the distinction is right there in the wording of the Amendment. Foreign citizens are ultimately subject to the jurisdiction of their native country. Thus the ability of a foreign nation to intervene with appeals on behalf of their citizens who run afoul of the law in the U.S. It is self-evident, or should be, that the newly born offspring of a foreign citizen is also subject to the jurisdiction of their parent's native country.
Lacking a court ruling to affirm that interpretation it can certainly be clarified with additional legislation but the distinction already exists in the 14th Amendment and the Executive Branch could simply assert that it is the policy, in accord with the 14th A., that children born here of foreign citizens are not U.S. citizens.
I got the virus warning too.
How do you read the 14th in light of
From Ann Coulter ?
If he is, indeed, as you describe him (and he appears to me), he should be aware of this.
As you, I believe many interpretations of the 14th Amendment are flawed...by a failure to recognize the final clause. Congress may certainly determine who is "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". Especially since it was the court who previously stepped beyond their purview and determined who was "subject to the jurisdiction thereof".
Remember, he used to write for The New Republic and worked for Walter Mondale. I don't see why conservatives get so excited about him.
Krauthammer also tried, last week, to tell us that the price of the Chevy Volt would be the $41,000 sticker price PLUS the $7500 tax credit. I know he majored in medicine not math, but errors like these will undermine his credibility.
Sounds like a top agenda item for the new Republican congress. Here’s hopin that we have one and that they get the message.
Or is the legal word "jurisdiction" to be given diametrically opposite meanings depending on the particular context (criminal prosecution vs. citizenship)? Or are there multiple aspects of "jurisdiction that can be changed by statute for some purposes but not others?
I don't know the answer--just asking.
Help Texas watch her borders.
Watch live on 14 cameras and report illegal alien invaders.
Night cams in operation
Does it work? Yes.
Recently caught on cam and reported:
String of illegals running through brush with backpacks
Numerous sightings of boats crossing the river
Numerous vehicles late at night in isolated areas
Skip to the last sentence of the Amendment. It is a clause that appears in many of the Amendments. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
There you have it, in the plain language of the Constitution itself. Congress can define by statute who is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
Perhaps it's even more than "can," but in fact, "must."
Given that the 14th specifies not only birth, but ALSO being "subject to the jurisdiction" ("and") as requirements for US citizenship, I wonder if the lack of a specific jurisdictional law for the illegal Mexican problem actually PROHIBITS any inclusion into US citizenship.
Yeah, the anchor babies have the birth part. But where is the (apparently mandatory) declaration of subject jurisdiction in law? Is there a general jurisdiction law they are eligible for, or is such inclusion lacking? And if it IS lacking (or the general law is inadequate), isn't the jurisdictional specificity requirement of the 14th incomplete - and thus the complete US citizenship requirements unfulfilled, and therefore void?
I find Krauthammer dead wrong on any item pertaining to Illegal Aliens. He is Open Borders/Pro-Illegal Alien Amnesty.
Your analysis was spot on Congressman BillyBob. Notice that the ones bringing up the 14th Amendment issue (notably Lindsey Graham) are the most pro-Amnesty in Congress. The 14th Amendment issue is just a ruse to fool the public...while Graham and other pro-Illegal/Anti-American politicians try to pass Illegal Alien Amnesty
Bump the BillyBob man.
Well, Congressman Billybob, let me put you on the spot a little bit.
During Civil War Reconstruction, the Radical Republicans informed the southern states that they would NOT be allowed back into the Union unless they ratified the 14th Amendment.
How can a “state” that is NOT a state be allowed to vote on a constitutional amendment? And how can an amendment be considered “ratified” by a state that is not a state?
Just want to get your opinion on this conundrum....
Who gets to say who are subject to the jurisdiction?
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside
Rephrase the sentence. All persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside and are under the jurisdiction of the United States.
That does not change the meaning of the sentence and explains who says who is under the jurisdiction.
John, we are oftentimes on opposite sides of the liberty debates, with me calling for less government in areas you and others want more (including Krauthammer) but on this you are spot on!