Exactly. It means nothing, which is why we need to adjudicate it. This should not be at the whim of the Senate. The Senate commissioned the Tribe-Olson opinion.
The only reason the Senate did this was to legitimize Obama. Yes, Obama. Look at who co-sponsored the resolution. Why the gratuitous mention of Obama's eligibility in the Tribe-Olson opinion? It is clear to me.
That is also controversial and needs to be killed. Anchor babies and their parents are subject to the jurisdiction of their native country
We need this tested as well. A President Trump could issue an executive order or Congress could pass a law outlawing birthright citizenship. The ACLU and others will challenge it and it will go to the courts up to SCOTUS. If SCOTUS does not uphold the law, then the last recourse is a Constitutional amendment. Ireland was the last European country to get rid of birthright citizenship. They did it thru constitutional amendment.
No. The author considers them to be foreigners. Even though born here, their parents are not citizens. They are also citizens of the parents' nationality.
Right now, they are considered US citizens eligible to be President unless the courts rule otherwise. There are two ways to become a citizen: naturalization or by birth. Hence the need to define what natural born citizen really means by the courts as it pertains to the Presidency. The candidacies of Rubio and Jindal raised these kinds of questions.
Again, I really don't want to go down this path because it will just consume too much energy at this point. We will then get into the 14th Amendment, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), etc.
Well it raised my hackles, I didn't hear anybody else talking about it.