Author Topic: Citizenship jeopardy  (Read 959 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Pandora

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 19529
  • I iz also makin a list. U on it pal.
Citizenship jeopardy
« on: October 18, 2011, 03:01:33 PM »
Quote
The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was added during Senate debate [wherein] the authors discussed in great detail their purpose and intentions in adding the requirement that a person be born, not just in the United States, but "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." Sen. Howard, sponsor and author of the Citizenship Clause, when questioned about the meaning of "jurisdiction," responded that the phrase was intended to be read as meaning "not owing allegiance to anybody else." Sen. Trumbull, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, described persons who "are not subject to our jurisdiction in the sense of owing allegiance solely to the United States." Chairman Trumbull noted that even "partial allegiance if you please, to some other government" is sufficient to disqualify a person under the jurisdiction requirement.

Finally.  A good definition for which I've been asking.  So many believe that merely being subject to our country's laws informs "subject to the jurisdiction thereof".  But only our country, mind; the young man caned in China for vandalism did not automatically become a Chinese citizen, however children of illegal aliens in ours do.

The subject of the article is Al Awlaki and Hamdi as regards the question of their US citizenships and presents evidence that despite the occasion of their births here, they do not qualify.

Quote
In 2005, the year after the Hamdi decision, the House Subcommittee on Immigration convened the hearing "Dual Citizenship, Birthright Citizenship, and the Meaning of Sovereignty." Dr. Eastman, an expert witness at the hearing, noted:

    With the absurdity of Hamdi's claim of citizenship so recently and vividly before us, it is time for the courts, and for the political branches as well, to revisit Justice Gray's erroneous interpretation of that language [i.e., in Wong Kim Ark], restoring to the constitutional mandate what its drafters actually intended, that only a complete jurisdiction, of the kind that brings with it a total and exclusive allegiance, is sufficient to qualify for the grant of citizenship to which the people of the United States actually consented.

Interesting and informative.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/citizenship_jeopardy.html
"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

Offline Libertas

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 63992
  • Alea iacta est! Libertatem aut mori!
Re: Citizenship jeopardy
« Reply #1 on: October 18, 2011, 08:45:07 PM »
"not owing allegiance to anybody else."

That!

What is the allegiance of the parents of the anchor babies?  How will that attachment translate to the anchor baby?!
We are now where The Founders were when they faced despotism.