Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message

14th amendment and airplanes with flyover citizenship

Posted on 6/30/26 at 11:37 pm
Posted by 1loyalbamafan
alabama
Member since Mar 2015
4098 posts
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-.... ???
Posted by TBoy
Kalamazoo
Member since Dec 2007
28872 posts
Posted on 6/30/26 at 11:48 pm to
You got ‘em now
Posted by biglego
San Francisco
Member since Nov 2007
85105 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:33 am to
The idea of replacing native whites with the third world makes you all wet doesn’t it
Posted by Powerman
Member since Jan 2004
174879 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:46 am to
Replacing would suggest that the white people have to leave. Did I miss something?
Posted by 1loyalbamafan
alabama
Member since Mar 2015
4098 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:52 am to
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



Posted by RollTide1987
Baltimore, MD
Member since Nov 2009
71392 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 1:14 am to
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 by antibarner
Member since Oct 2009
26858 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 1:15 am to
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.
This post was edited on 7/1/26 at 1:17 am
Posted by 1loyalbamafan
alabama
Member since Mar 2015
4098 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 1:16 am to
Congress can and should fix it.
Posted by NytroBud
LaFayette
Member since Jun 2009
6158 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 5:00 am to
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 by HagaDaga
Member since Oct 2020
8308 posts
Posted on 7/1/26 at 5:11 am to
So are children, born here, of diplomats now citizens?
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram