https://open.spotify.com/episode/60rXDfAmVLDJ67biKXMqck
Yoo: Yep
Epstein: Nope
The relevant text: The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, specifically Section 1, addresses birthright citizenship. It states: "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 argument turns on what the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means.
https://open.spotify.com/episode/60rXDfAmVLDJ67biKXMqck
Yoo: Yep
Epstein: Nope
The relevant text: The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, specifically Section 1, addresses birthright citizenship. It states: "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 argument turns on what the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means.
Everyone knows it applied to freed slaves and has zero application to people illegally coming over the border. Everyone.
Certain Native Americans weren't given citizenship until around the 1920s even though they were born here. Also, laws are designed to encourage good behavior. This would only encourage people to break the law.
Everyone knows it applied to freed slaves and has zero application to people illegally coming over the border. Everyone.
No one is claiming it applies to those people.
Everyone knows it applied to freed slaves and has zero application to people illegally coming over the border. Everyone.
No one is claiming it applies to those people.
Sure you are. You saying they can sneak across the border, pop out a baby, and be rewarded with their anchor baby getting citizenship. The 14th Amendment doesn't apply if to you if your parents came here illegally.
Sure you are. You saying they can sneak across the border, pop out a baby, and be rewarded with their anchor baby getting citizenship. The 14th Amendment doesn’t apply if to you if your parents came here illegally.
Where does it say that?
Everyone knows it applied to freed slaves and has zero application to people illegally coming over the border. Everyone.
Apparently not John Yoo. Stupid shitlib.
“subject to the jurisdiction thereof”
Obviously specifically ruling out the diplomatic corps of other nations as far as I know they are the only people not subject to laws.
Oh, and I guess the President.
Invading armies, too?“subject to the jurisdiction thereof”
Obviously specifically ruling out the diplomatic corps of other nations as far as I know they are the only people not subject to laws.
Oh, and I guess the President.
But you should listen. Epstein can talk endlessly about any number of subjects and sometimes you have to stop and go back to figure out why he traveled down the tributary of thought he did, but even if you think he's wrong, you'll learn a lot.
https://open.spotify.com/episode/60rXDfAmVLDJ67biKXMqck
Yoo: Yep
Epstein: Nope
The relevant text: The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, specifically Section 1, addresses birthright citizenship. It states: "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 argument turns on what the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means.
Yes, for the most part.
It clearly doesn't apply to children of foreign officials enjoying some form of diplomatic immunity. If an ambassador or head of state gave birth while on an official visit or while here as part of her diplomatic station, the child would not be a citizen. The wife of the same, also, not a citizen. If the wife were here legally, but independent of her husband's role, that might be trickier. Say, for example, a Saudi princess fled to America and asked for protection/asylum, and we granted her leave to stay. If she gave birth, possibly a citizen.
Every foreign national who is not here in an official governmental capacity, but is still here legally, absolutely, their child is a citizen.*
I think the argument for unauthorized residents is a gray area. I think a good argument could be made that "anchor babies" are not citizens. But I think an argument can be made they are, as well. I think that's an open question that, up until recently, we probably assumed was closed.
*EDIT: I could see a distinction made between, say, those here on a tourist or student visa, and those who have, say, permanent resident status. That would require new law, though, as far as I am aware. There is no precedent for such a distinction.
@bradstevens I think you need to edit your post and get rid of that spoiler because you broke something.
But, no, I don't think being born in flight would count.
Everyone knows it applied to freed slaves and has zero application to people illegally coming over the border. Everyone.
No one is claiming it applies to those people.
Sure you are. You saying they can sneak across the border, pop out a baby, and be rewarded with their anchor baby getting citizenship. The 14th Amendment doesn't apply if to you if your parents came here illegally.
Bet your great great great grandparents came here illegally. Time to deport dbm, Pack your bags for your free trip to El Salvador.
If we get into this, then why only go back 1 generation? Time to correct the wrongs of the past and look into ancestry.com to determine lineage and who is truly here legally.
@bradstevens listen to it? It looks like an hour long. I never knew Evelyn. Woods had a speed listening class.
Everyone knows it applied to freed slaves and has zero application to people illegally coming over the border. Everyone.
No one is claiming it applies to those people.
Sure you are. You saying they can sneak across the border, pop out a baby, and be rewarded with their anchor baby getting citizenship. The 14th Amendment doesn't apply if to you if your parents came here illegally.
Bet your great great great grandparents came here illegally.
What on earth would compel you to believe that? Is your belief that American immigration has always been a free for all?
Leftists are so dumb.
Everyone knows it applied to freed slaves and has zero application to people illegally coming over the border. Everyone.
No one is claiming it applies to those people.
Sure you are. You saying they can sneak across the border, pop out a baby, and be rewarded with their anchor baby getting citizenship. The 14th Amendment doesn't apply if to you if your parents came here illegally.
Bet your great great great grandparents came here illegally.
What on earth would compel you to believe that? Is your belief that American immigration has always been a free for all?
Leftists are so dumb.
I believe until the 1880s, anyone could show up. Until the 1920s anyone not Chinese could just show up. Is that wrong?