• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The 14th Amendment Birthright Citizenship was intended for the children of freed slaves

Buster Keaton

Buster Keaton

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 16, 2025
Messages
1,720
Reaction score
807
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution, apportionment, slavery slaves citizenship vote
www.14thamendment.us
Post-Civil War reforms focused on injustices to African Americans.
The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of native-born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently-freed slaves.
It was written in a manner so as to prevent state governments from ever denying citizenship to Blacks born in the United States.
But in 1868, the United States had no formal immigration policy, and the authors therefore saw no need to address immigration explicitly in the amendment.
The United States did not limit immigration in 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified.
Thus by definition there were no illegal immigrants and the issue of citizenship for children of those here in violation of the law was nonexistent.
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete.
With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child.
Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.

Comment:
Birthright Citizenship was never intended for the children of people who illegally entered our country.
It was intended to protect the children of freed slaves.
It is automatically assumed that Birthright Citizenship includes the children of American citizens.
Therefore if neither of the parents of a child who is born on American soil are American citizens, then that child should not be granted birthright citizenship.
 
Words have consequences. Parse the words.

”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 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

SECTION. 1. 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United...
constitutioncenter.org
 
Rexedgar said:
Words have consequences. Parse the words.

”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 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

SECTION. 1. 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United...
constitutioncenter.org
Click to expand...
Birthright Citizenship was intended to protect the children of freed slaves, not for the children of people who violated or immigration laws.
The word "intent" is a very important word for constitutional legitimacy.
 
Buster Keaton said:

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution, apportionment, slavery slaves citizenship vote
www.14thamendment.us
Post-Civil War reforms focused on injustices to African Americans.
The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of native-born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently-freed slaves.
It was written in a manner so as to prevent state governments from ever denying citizenship to Blacks born in the United States.
But in 1868, the United States had no formal immigration policy, and the authors therefore saw no need to address immigration explicitly in the amendment.
The United States did not limit immigration in 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified.
Thus by definition there were no illegal immigrants and the issue of citizenship for children of those here in violation of the law was nonexistent.
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete.
With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child.
Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.

Comment:
Birthright Citizenship was never intended for the children of people who illegally entered our country.
It was intended to protect the children of freed slaves.
It is automatically assumed that Birthright Citizenship includes the children of American citizens.
Therefore if neither of the parents of a child who is born on American soil are American citizens, then that child should not be granted birthright citizenship.
Click to expand...
Which of these words is too big for you:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside
Click to expand...

I will be happy to explain in smaller words for you any part you are confused by. I realize you have problems with polysyllabic words.
 
Buster Keaton said:
Birthright Citizenship was intended to protect the children of freed slaves, not for the children of people who violated or immigration laws.
The word "intent" is a very important word for constitutional legitimacy.
Click to expand...
Proving intent is difficult. And often open to differing interpretations.

In the instant case, as @Rexedgar and @Redress point out, there is the phrase, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States". That word "all" sure doesn't indicate an intent to limit this citizenship to "children of freed slaves".

In fact, it speaks to the absence of intent to limit birthright citizenship to "children of freed slaves".
 
Last edited:
Buster Keaton said:
Birthright Citizenship was intended to protect the children of freed slaves, not for the children of people who violated or immigration laws.
The word "intent" is a very important word for constitutional legitimacy.
Click to expand...
The second amendment was intended for muskets...

No, srsly, your argument is really that stupid.
 
Buster Keaton said:

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution, apportionment, slavery slaves citizenship vote
www.14thamendment.us
Post-Civil War reforms focused on injustices to African Americans.
The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of native-born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently-freed slaves.
It was written in a manner so as to prevent state governments from ever denying citizenship to Blacks born in the United States.
But in 1868, the United States had no formal immigration policy, and the authors therefore saw no need to address immigration explicitly in the amendment.
The United States did not limit immigration in 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified.
Thus by definition there were no illegal immigrants and the issue of citizenship for children of those here in violation of the law was nonexistent.
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete.
With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child.
Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.

Comment:
Birthright Citizenship was never intended for the children of people who illegally entered our country.
It was intended to protect the children of freed slaves.
It is automatically assumed that Birthright Citizenship includes the children of American citizens.
Therefore if neither of the parents of a child who is born on American soil are American citizens, then that child should not be granted birthright citizenship.
Click to expand...
WRONG
The era of the 14th amendment kicked it off, but the writers of it knew better.
 
Buster Keaton said:
Birthright Citizenship was intended to protect the children of freed slaves, not for the children of people who violated or immigration laws.
The word "intent" is a very important word for constitutional legitimacy.
Click to expand...


”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.”

Not "All except..."
 
Buster Keaton said:

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution, apportionment, slavery slaves citizenship vote
www.14thamendment.us
Post-Civil War reforms focused on injustices to African Americans.
The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of native-born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently-freed slaves.
It was written in a manner so as to prevent state governments from ever denying citizenship to Blacks born in the United States.
But in 1868, the United States had no formal immigration policy, and the authors therefore saw no need to address immigration explicitly in the amendment.
The United States did not limit immigration in 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified.
Thus by definition there were no illegal immigrants and the issue of citizenship for children of those here in violation of the law was nonexistent.
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete.
With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child.
Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.

Comment:
Birthright Citizenship was never intended for the children of people who illegally entered our country.
It was intended to protect the children of freed slaves.
It is automatically assumed that Birthright Citizenship includes the children of American citizens.
Therefore if neither of the parents of a child who is born on American soil are American citizens, then that child should not be granted birthright citizenship.
Click to expand...
Bullshit. You lot can chorus, "What they really meant was..." till the cows come home but what's written in the Constitution is the law of the land until you take the steps to change it.
 
Redress said:
Which of these words is too big for you:



I will be happy to explain in smaller words for you any part you are confused by. I realize you have problems with polysyllabic words.
Click to expand...
most left wingers are a waste of time
it is clear that birthright citizenship was never intended for people who violated our immigration laws
 
Buster Keaton said:
most left wingers are a waste of time
it is clear that birthright citizenship was never intended for people who violated our immigration laws
Click to expand...
Then maybe they should have used different words. What the amendment says is "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside". Words mean things, and you do not magically get to redefine those words to try and get the meaning you want.
 
Buster Keaton said:

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution, apportionment, slavery slaves citizenship vote
www.14thamendment.us
Post-Civil War reforms focused on injustices to African Americans.
The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of native-born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently-freed slaves.
It was written in a manner so as to prevent state governments from ever denying citizenship to Blacks born in the United States.
But in 1868, the United States had no formal immigration policy, and the authors therefore saw no need to address immigration explicitly in the amendment.
The United States did not limit immigration in 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified.
Thus by definition there were no illegal immigrants and the issue of citizenship for children of those here in violation of the law was nonexistent.
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete.
With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child.
Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.

Comment:
Birthright Citizenship was never intended for the children of people who illegally entered our country.
It was intended to protect the children of freed slaves.
It is automatically assumed that Birthright Citizenship includes the children of American citizens.
Therefore if neither of the parents of a child who is born on American soil are American citizens, then that child should not be granted birthright citizenship.
Click to expand...

Can you describe how this logic is different than saying the 2nd Amendment only covers muskets?
 
Narrow interpretations of the 14th type arguments haven’t to be very effective in front of SCOTUS in the past 🤷‍♀️
 
Buster Keaton said:
Birthright Citizenship was intended to protect the children of freed slaves, not for the children of people who violated or immigration laws.
The word "intent" is a very important word for constitutional legitimacy.
Click to expand...
“Intended” is doing a heavy lift here. That part was added to the Constitution 85-90 year after the original bill. The authors and framers were.’t fortune tellers, they wrote for the times that they lived in. If there is a change to the document needed, and I think there is, there is a procedure for that, good luck!
 
Buster Keaton said:
most left wingers are a waste of time
it is clear that birthright citizenship was never intended for people who violated our immigration laws
Click to expand...
If it is so clear, prove your point. You are the one making this assertion, the onus on you is to back it up. Let's see some expert (legal) opinion that supports your position. The amendment was worded the way it was with full knowledge there would be others born in the US in the future, that had nothing to do with slavery nor the civil war, which were in the rear view mirror at the time. It seems if the intent was only to cover this specific set of people then why wasn't the amendment so worded?

Meanwhile, 2nd amendment proponents cling to the poorly worded 2nd amendment which was never designed to give cover to the use of automatic weapons to effect mass killings of innocents.... though that is another discussion, the same logic is applied....
 
Buster Keaton said:

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution

14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - original intent - US Constitution, apportionment, slavery slaves citizenship vote
www.14thamendment.us
Post-Civil War reforms focused on injustices to African Americans.
The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of native-born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently-freed slaves.
It was written in a manner so as to prevent state governments from ever denying citizenship to Blacks born in the United States.
But in 1868, the United States had no formal immigration policy, and the authors therefore saw no need to address immigration explicitly in the amendment.
The United States did not limit immigration in 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified.
Thus by definition there were no illegal immigrants and the issue of citizenship for children of those here in violation of the law was nonexistent.
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete.
With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child.
Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.

Comment:
Birthright Citizenship was never intended for the children of people who illegally entered our country.
It was intended to protect the children of freed slaves.
It is automatically assumed that Birthright Citizenship includes the children of American citizens.
Therefore if neither of the parents of a child who is born on American soil are American citizens, then that child should not be granted birthright citizenship.
Click to expand...

No it wasn't. While it's certainly important to remember that the 14th amendment was meant specifically to make sure the South during Reconstruction didn't find ways to oppress African Americans. Since all American citizens are endowed with rights, the Reconstruction Republicans wanted to make sure the South couldn't take away African American's citizenship. They knew the only way to do that was to make sure that everyone born in the country, has automatically a citizen, and not something that was subject to the will of the South. What you say when you mean "Reconstruction was for the children of enslaved people" is incredibly short sighted. That's why the Reconstruction Republicans knew to make sure the South couldn't ever strip people of their citizenship again, not only the children of enslaved people, but their grand children, and everyone born in the US could become citizens.
 
upsideguy said:
If it is so clear, prove your point. You are the one making this assertion, the onus on you is to back it up. Let's see some expert (legal) opinion that supports your position.

Meanwhile, 2nd amendment proponents cling to the poorly worded 2nd amendment which was never designed to give cover to the use of automatic weapons to effect mass killings of innocents.... though that is another discussion, the same logic is applied....
Click to expand...
who was the birthright citizenship clause written for?
you are fighting reality
 
Buster Keaton said:
is this too complex?
birthright citizenship is never intended for people who illegally entered our country
Click to expand...
Apparently for you it is too complex. Whatever the writers of the 14th amendment intended(and it is somewhat more complex than you think, but I will let your ignorance of history go as it would take too long to correct you), what they wrote was
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside" and that is what was passed. 37 states(though it was a really complicated, convoluted process) ratified those words. Not some other words that you might wish the authors might have written.
 
Scatty Kitty said:
No it wasn't. While it's certainly important to remember that the 14th amendment was meant specifically to make sure the South during Reconstruction didn't find ways to oppress African Americans. Since all American citizens are endowed with rights, the Reconstruction Republicans wanted to make sure the South couldn't take away African American's citizenship. They knew the only way to do that was to make sure that everyone born in the country, has automatically a citizen, and not something that was subject to the will of the South. What you say when you mean "Reconstruction was for the children of enslaved people" is incredibly short sighted. That's why the Reconstruction Republicans knew to make sure the South couldn't ever strip people of their citizenship again, not only the children of enslaved people, but their grand children, and everyone born in the US could become citizens.
Click to expand...
it was never intended for people who were not legal citizens
 
Buster Keaton said:
who was the birthright citizenship clause written for?
you are fighting reality
Click to expand...
No, I am fighting bigotry and ignorance, which I do here often. I asked you to provide 3rd party of evidence of your claim. As I pointed out, the amendment was worded globally and did not specify a particular population. It may have been inspired by slavery, but claiming it is limited to it is a stretch. It is a stretch that you are making.... prove it!

You made the claim, if you can not support it, you can not assert it as truth. Try again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom