T And T Garage
Serious Thumper
Offline
SuzukiSavage.com Rocks!
Posts: 9839
|
verslagen1 wrote on 08/27/19 at 11:50:55:T And T Garage wrote on 08/27/19 at 08:28:43:verslagen1 wrote on 08/27/19 at 08:15:24:T And T Garage wrote on 08/26/19 at 21:55:11:But one thing jog.... The 14th doesn't segregate..... "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."[/color] Are illegal aliens "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" if they have not presented them selves as such? All persons born... Debate that all you want. Quote:In the famous Slaughter-House cases of 1872, the Supreme Court stated that this qualifying phrase was intended to exclude “children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.” Yep, that was a Supreme Court decision/observation. But - and it's a big but - the Amendment stands without that distinction. So... interpretation is open.
From Wikipedia:
The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution indicates that "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." The Supreme Court of the United States affirmed in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees citizenship for nearly all individuals born in the United States, provided that their parents are foreign citizens, have permanent domicile status in the United States, and are engaging in business in the United States except performing in a diplomatic or official capacity of a foreign power.
Most constitutional scholars agree that the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides birthright citizenship even to those born in the United States to illegal immigrants.[24] As of 2015, there has been no Supreme Court decision that explicitly holds that persons born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants are automatically afforded U.S. citizenship.[24][25][26][27][28][29][30] Edward Erler, writing for the Claremont Institute, said that since the Wong Kim Ark case dealt with someone whose parents were in the United States legally, it provides no valid basis under the 14th Amendment for the practice of granting citizenship to U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants. He goes on to argue that if governmental permission for parental entry is a necessary requirement for bestowal of birthright citizenship, then children of undocumented immigrants must surely be excluded from citizenship.[31] However, in Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982), a case involving educational entitlements for children in the United States unlawfully, Justice Brennan, writing for a five-to-four majority, held that such persons were subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and thus protected by its laws. In a footnote, he observed, "no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment 'jurisdiction' can be drawn between resident immigrants whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident immigrants whose entry was unlawful."
See? Lots of room for debate.
|