Actually, the 14th Amendment prohibited birthright citizenship
Most constitutional experts know that there exists no birthright citizenship in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I and others have made this case for many years. Unfortunately, House Speaker Paul Ryan represents the class of politicians least informed on this subject when he said, “As a conservative, I’m a believer in following the plain text of the Constitution, and I think in this case the 14th Amendment is pretty clear.”
If he were a constitutionalist, he would know better.
Currently, the Democratic Party leadership do not care whether it is or is not constitutional as they view all illegal immigrants as future Democrats. The ignorance of the establishment press too is overwhelming. So we make the case once again.
Most have sympathy for those who were infants or born here when their parents illegally crossed the border when have lived here all their lives and know no other country. The 14th Amendment seems to validate such sympathy if we ignore six 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.”
A more careful read, however, shows that such was specifically and purposely denied, not supported.
Consider the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The purpose of the clause was to guarantee citizenship to freed slaves (already residents) and their descendants after the Civil War. It had nothing to do with immigration. Recipients were already subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
The concept of “anchor babies” refers to those whose parents are illegal immigrants into the United States and while here have a baby. That baby, ignoring those crucial six words, then inherits full citizenship and even the right later as an adult to sponsor his or her own illegal parents in their quest for citizenship. The debate for or against the practice of allowing citizenship for babies of illegal immigrants born in the U.S. rages on with virtually no one going to the source of the alleged authority — the crafters of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.
Senator Jacob Merritt Howard, architect of the 14th Amendment, actually structured the Amendment, one of two defining the legal status of freed slaves after the Civil War — the other being the 13th which gave them freedom — to prevent that very interpretation.
He said, “This amendment, which I have offered, is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and [already] 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 minister accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.”
It was he who insisted that the qualifying phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” be inserted.
Those crossing our borders illegally are clearly foreigners, not residents, and therefore not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States — and thus they are specifically exempt from citizenship.
Notice also the exclusion of babies born of ambassadors while here. The record of the Senate deliberations on the 14th amendment shows no other interpretation.
There is no such thing as automatic citizenship from this amendment without serious distortion of it. In fact, Lyman Trumbull, co-author of the 13th Amendment — outlawing slavery — addressing the definition of the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” asked, “What do we mean by complete jurisdiction thereof? Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.”
Those crossing our borders illegally have jurisdiction or allegiance elsewhere and thus cannot have birthright citizenship. How can a child of such a parentage have what his parents clearly do not have?
How many are born illegally in the United States per year? Statistics are difficult to validate. But the Pew Hispanic Center study estimated 340,000 in 2008 alone, and recent research has doubled illegal entry from 11 to 22 million, so births from illegals are also presumed to be double. The Center for Immigration Studies estimated the annual cost providing healthcare, education, and food stamps for many and all other incidental costs at $2.4 billion — and that was based upon the presumed 11 million.
Citizenship was denied Native Americans until 1924 as they owed allegiance to their Sioux, Apache, Blackfoot, or whatever Indian nations they were from and thus were not yet “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” of the nation they lived within. Certainly, one must cease to be at war or conflict with the conquering country. So just being on U.S. soil did not make them citizens automatically until the “jurisdiction thereof” part of the Amendment was satisfied.
Many of our Mexican friends send portions of their paychecks home to Mexico and plan to return to their native land upon retirement with pensions and/or social security sent to their “first” country from the country they extracted their wealth — the United States. Some vote in Mexican elections from here.
It is indeed hard to argue that they are not instead subject to the jurisdiction of another land other than the United States — and most admit it. Again, the 14th Amendment specifically denies birthright citizenship.
Birthright citizenship does not apply to children of immigrants or foreigners
The viewpoints expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Independent.
How to submit an article, guest opinion piece, or letter to the editor to The Independent
Do you have something to say? Want your voice to be heard by thousands of readers? Send The Independent your letter to the editor or guest opinion piece. All submissions will be considered for publication by our editorial staff. If your letter or editorial is accepted, it will run on suindependent.com, and we’ll promote it through all of our social media channels. We may even decide to include it in our monthly print edition. Just follow our simple submission guidelines and make your voice heard:
—Submissions should be between 300 and 1,500 words.
—Submissions must be sent to editor@infowest.com as a .doc, .docx, .txt, or .rtf file.
—The subject line of the email containing your submission should read “Letter to the editor.”
—Attach your name to both the email and the document file (we don’t run anonymous letters).
—If you have a photo or image you’d like us to use and it’s in .jpg format, at least 1200 X 754 pixels large, and your intellectual property (you own the copyright), feel free to attach it as well, though we reserve the right to choose a different image.
—If you are on Twitter and would like a shout-out when your piece or letter is published, include that in your correspondence and we’ll give you a mention at the time of publication.
![Pinterest](https://pinterest.com/pin/create/button/?url=https://suindependent.com/14th-amendment-birthright-citizenship-subject-jurisdiction-thereof/&media=https://suindependent.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/girl-1418908_1280-copy.jpg&description=The 14th Amendment prohibited birthright citizenship in six crucial words: “subject to the jurisdiction thereof."){kind=link}
Typical Mormon exclusions. They look at all things in a different way because of the teachings of the LDS church. It is guilty of serious discrimination of anyone who does not practice their faith. I lived in Utah and was subjected to such discrimination from some members of the church.