- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
14th amendment and airplanes with flyover citizenship
Posted on 6/30/26 at 11:37 pm
Posted on 6/30/26 at 11:37 pm
The 14th amendment was introduced into the senate by senator Jacob Howard,(1866) who was also the senate manager for the amendment. At the time, citizenship was with the individual states and he co-authored an amendment to section 1 of the 14th amendment (the citizenship clause) for the purpose of insuring that one state couldn't deny constitutional protections to a citizen of a different state. According to him, a restriction on the states, and nothing more. In introducing his amendment to the senate, he said:
"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."
This was followed by extensive debate, which wasn't about birthright citizenship at all. Birth tourism wasn't very feasible in 1866. The debate was over if this clause conferred citizenship to American Indians.
So here the man who co-authored the clause that supposedly created birthright citizenship, said very explicitly that it didn't. What are some possibilities?
1. He was simply careless, didn't write down what he meant, and convinced the senate that he didn't need to?
2. That it was perfectly clear at the time that birthright citizenship wasn't conferred, and that understanding has been conveniently forgotten to illegitimately change the meaning of the 14th amendment?
3. The ambiguity was an intentional deception to fool the legislators and public, similar to the "You can keep your insurance" lie that was needed to get obamacare passed?
4-.... ???
"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."
This was followed by extensive debate, which wasn't about birthright citizenship at all. Birth tourism wasn't very feasible in 1866. The debate was over if this clause conferred citizenship to American Indians.
So here the man who co-authored the clause that supposedly created birthright citizenship, said very explicitly that it didn't. What are some possibilities?
1. He was simply careless, didn't write down what he meant, and convinced the senate that he didn't need to?
2. That it was perfectly clear at the time that birthright citizenship wasn't conferred, and that understanding has been conveniently forgotten to illegitimately change the meaning of the 14th amendment?
3. The ambiguity was an intentional deception to fool the legislators and public, similar to the "You can keep your insurance" lie that was needed to get obamacare passed?
4-.... ???
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:33 am to TBoy
The idea of replacing native whites with the third world makes you all wet doesn’t it
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:46 am to biglego
Replacing would suggest that the white people have to leave. Did I miss something?
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:52 am to TBoy
Just some info for anyone interested.
Mr Howard - The first amendment is to section one, declaring that "all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside" I do not propose to say anything on that subject except that the question of citizenship has been so fully discussed in this body as not to need any further elucidation, in my opinion. This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born in the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of embassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will included every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.
Congressional Globe for the 39th congress, session 1, part 4
Also in the Senate Journal
Mr Howard - The first amendment is to section one, declaring that "all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside" I do not propose to say anything on that subject except that the question of citizenship has been so fully discussed in this body as not to need any further elucidation, in my opinion. This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born in the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of embassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will included every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.
Congressional Globe for the 39th congress, session 1, part 4
Also in the Senate Journal
Posted on 7/1/26 at 1:14 am to 1loyalbamafan
Yeah, I feel like SCOTUS got this incredibly wrong here. If birthright citizenship was conferred on every single person living in the United States in 1866, then there would have been no need to make Native Americans citizens of the United States in a separate piece of congressional legislation in 1924.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 1:15 am to 1loyalbamafan
The way to end this crap, and Congress CAN do this, is change the laws concerning illegal immigration. Increase the penalties and make it a felony to overstay your visa. A felony to enter the country for the purpose of having a child . That child might be a citizen, but your arse will go to prison. Anyone assisting you will be an accessory.
A felony to cross into the country illegally. Period, Anyone hiring or assisting an illegal in any manner shall be guilty of a felony, Put that in your sanctuary city and smoke it.
They can pass their 14th, but we can make them howl. Give them 10 years,.You don't need any Constitutional Amendment and John Roberts can't save them.
A felony to cross into the country illegally. Period, Anyone hiring or assisting an illegal in any manner shall be guilty of a felony, Put that in your sanctuary city and smoke it.
They can pass their 14th, but we can make them howl. Give them 10 years,.You don't need any Constitutional Amendment and John Roberts can't save them.
This post was edited on 7/1/26 at 1:17 am
Posted on 7/1/26 at 1:16 am to RollTide1987
Congress can and should fix it.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 5:00 am to 1loyalbamafan
quote:
Congress can and should fix it.
But they wont, not enough votes and after the midterms the Dems will have the advantage then nothing will get done.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 5:11 am to 1loyalbamafan
So are children, born here, of diplomats now citizens?
Popular
Back to top
2








