Posted on 10/31/2018 1:35:53 PM PDT by mikelets456
The site I listed really does not have the answer I'm looking for but we got on this discussion at work. I understand the 14th amendment clause, 1866 dealing with the civil rights acts etc. The question I have is a person I work with is from Canada. While he was waiting for his citizenship he had 3 children. Then he received his citizenship. I argue that the intention to become a citizen has been started and in the works, therefore establishing "intent". My co-worker argues that his kids are not citizens and Trump's EO and the 14th amendment would kick them out. I'm simply seeking the truth...
His kids are US Citizens. He was in the US legally (had been given a Green Card) hence he was “under the jurisdiction of the United States”.
Regarding the “birthright” of illegals, I hope Trump or Congress or both pursue the issue. A court ruling would be a good thing to have on the record.
It looks like he has a case to take the proper jurisdiction, but he should do it as soon as possible so the kids don’t have a question mark over their heads.
I agree with your analysis, but I also believe we could use some clarification as to the rights of green card holders. And if at some time we create any new classification for the immigrants who are given some status, their rights with respect to citizenship ( and child birth citizenship) need to be clarified.
Com on Congress
“His kids are US Citizens. He was in the US legally (had been given a Green Card) hence he was “under the jurisdiction of the United States”.”
Legal resident...
Can I stir the pot and ask a question which may seem odd?
How exactly do we define citizenship? The vast majority of Americans do not have a passport. So for most, the evidence of citizenship would be a birth certificate.
Naturalized citizens have documentation of their naturalization. But most of us don’t have any documentation of being American except the birth certificate.
And for passport holders, in my case I recall the key document to get a passport was the birth certificate.
Noting that I’m not a citizenship judge, Sen. Jacob Howard, the author of the jurisdiction clause, had noted that citizens pay taxes. So did your friend file federal tax returns while he had the three children?
Of course they are——my mother hadn’t yet become a citizen when my brother and I were born.
,
Whether he paid taxes or not,he was here legally so his kids are citizens because they were born here.
.
>>>My co-worker argues that his kids are not citizens and Trump’s EO and the 14th amendment would kick them out<<<
POTUS Trump’s EO would and could not be Retroactive, unlike FDR’s EO that imprisoned American Citizens of Japanese Descent.
The 14th was never intended to apply to foreigners.
Any foreigners.
The Supreme Court stretched it to cover the children of foreigners here legally in Wong Kim Ark, but did not extend it to illegal aliens.
That was done administratively sometime in the 1960’s.
An executive order can remedy that.
Children of foreign nationals inherit the nationality(ies) of their foreign national parent(s).
That’s why the children of foreign nationals are NOT natural born citizens.
That’s also how Ted Cruz acquired US citizenship being born in Canada. A citizen by extension of his mother’s citizenship, but not a natural born citizen.
What was the mother’s status?
The court ruled in 1898 in Wong Kim Ark that the children of legal residents were citizens.
They did not address the children of illegal aliens.
His kids are actually now dual citizens of the US and Canada (technically illegal, but unenforceable as the US can’t control other countries decisions regarding citizenship).
With all due respect Mears, please consider the following.
Sen. Jacob Howard argued for the inclusion of the jurisdiction clause in the 14th Amendment to clarify that just because somebody is born in the US doesn’t mean that they are automatically a citizen.
From the congressional record, here is Sen. Howard’s clarification of the purpose of the jurisdiction clause.
"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens [emphasis added], who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country." A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774 - 1875 Congressional Globe, Senate, 39th Congress, 1st Session Page 2890 of 3840 (See about bottom half of middle column.)
Your Canuck friend is a liberal Democrat, and his argument is solely for the purpose of inflammation. I say take two Tylenol long lasting and tell him to shove off. His kids are native, but not natural born citizens...
He couldn’t possibly have kids all by himself. What is the citizenship status of his wife or girlfriend or surrogate?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.