The 14th Amendment Birthright Citizenship was intended for the children of freed slaves (1 Viewer)

[Buster Keaton]

How do you get to that with what you believe to be the intent of the 14th Amendment?

Read the ruling and the majority opinion by Justice Grey. It explains, on the 6-2 decision that anyone born inside the US gets citizenship and how it is NOT limited to, nor meant to be limited to, slaves. Also, his parents were not considered citizens of the US but of the Emperor of Chin

Is it egg first or is it chicken first?
It is s never ending circular argument
If one or both parents are citizens then the child has birthright citizenship.
If neither parents are citizens then the child doesn't have birthright citizenship
The purpose of the 14th amendment was to protect the the citizenship of the children of the emancipated slaves.

 

[Lursa]

Is it egg first or is it chicken first?
It is s never ending circular argument
If one or both parents are citizens then the child has birthright citizenship.
If neither parents are citizens then the child doesn't have birthright citizenship
The purpose of the 14th amendment was to protect the the citizenship of the children of the emancipated slaves.

my citation is the constitution

Great, please cite all of that from the Constitution.

 

[Gordy327]

My parents are citizens, therefore I am a citizen

You are a citizen because you were born in the US. If you were born in another country, you would be a citizen of that country.

If one parent is a citizen then the child has birthright citizenship

If a child is born on US soil, then that child is a citizen. The citizenship of the parents does not matter in that regard.

Is it egg first or is it chicken first?
It is s never ending circular argument
If one or both parents are citizens then the child has birthright citizenship.
If neither parents are citizens then the child doesn't have birthright citizenship
The purpose of the 14th amendment was to protect the the citizenship of the children of the emancipated slaves.

Still waiting for you to pint out the legal text, law, or ruling supporting your asserions!

 

[Nickyjo]

My parents are citizens, therefore I am a citizen

My friend's parents were immigrants. He was born here. Therefore he is a citizen. Are you more of a citizen than he?

 

[Hamish Howl]

My parents are citizens, therefore I am a citizen

Oh, so the old Jim Crow "grandfather clause" argument.

 

[Rich2018]

Is it egg first or is it chicken first?
It is s never ending circular argument

No, the egg came first

Every chicken came from an egg
But not everything that comes from an egg, is a chicken.

 

[Jason Warfield]

Is it egg first or is it chicken first?
It is s never ending circular argument
If one or both parents are citizens then the child has birthright citizenship.
If neither parents are citizens then the child doesn't have birthright citizenship
The purpose of the 14th amendment was to protect the the citizenship of the children of the emancipated slaves.

The last sentence of your response, if it were true, nullifies the third sentence and has no relevance to the fourth. That is, for the sake of argument, if your position of the last sentence was true. Thankfully, this was a hypothetical question of mine.

The Supreme Court delivered a ruling in 1898 in regard to the US vs Kim Wong Ark that states that birthright citizenship applies to anyone born in the US and territories no matter the status of the parents as long as they are not part of the diplomatic mission of the other nation to the US. It is in the ruling and explained by the majority opinion as written by Justice Grey.

So, unless you have a legal reference from the Supreme Court that overturns that ruling and majority opinion of that previous Supreme Court, along with the majority explanation, your argument is NOT law, is NOT how the Supreme Court has interpreted it, and it is just your opinion, nothing more. I have given you legal documentation that can be referenced as to why you are wrong.

At this point, in order for you to continue, you have to provide an equal measure of legal documentation. Your say-so on your opinion no longer cuts it. So, if you cannot, or will not, provide that...and no, citing the amendment doesn't count because it is the Supreme Court ruling that determines the amendment's scope and constitutionality...then you are done here. And I don't think anyone else needs to continue this discussion with you.

Side note: I noticed silence from you on the correction to Ark's parents. Just saying...

 

[Rich2018]

The Supreme Court delivered a ruling in 1898 in regard to the US vs Kim Wong Ark that states that birthright citizenship applies to anyone born in the US and territories no matter the status of the parents as long as they are not part of the diplomatic mission of the other nation to the US. It is in the ruling and explained by the majority opinion as written by Justice Grey.

Indeed:

Federal Court Blocks Trump Birthright Citizenship Executive Order | American Civil Liberties Union

CONCORD, N.H. — A federal court in New Hampshire today blocked President Trump’s executive order that seeks to strip certain babies born in the...

www.aclu.org

 

[rahl]

Ark's parents were considered to be citizens

No they weren’t

 

[rahl]

If one parent is a citizen then the child has birthright citizenship

The parents citizenship is irrelevant.

 

[rahl]

Is it egg first or is it chicken first?
It is s never ending circular argument
If one or both parents are citizens then the child has birthright citizenship.
If neither parents are citizens then the child doesn't have birthright citizenship
The purpose of the 14th amendment was to protect the the citizenship of the children of the emancipated slaves.

Repeatedly refuted