Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-11-2013, 12:45 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,808,044 times
Reputation: 14345

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Cite any federal law or Constitutional Amendment which states without restriction that all children born in the U.S. are U.S. citizens. You can't do it. I'm not the one arguing proof of the part, YOU are.
Children born into diplomatic families and children born of invading armies are the exceptions. You don't have any federal law or Constitutional Amendment or court decision which provides any further restrictions. Birthright citizenship is the position of the courts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-11-2013, 12:50 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,800 posts, read 44,594,609 times
Reputation: 13625
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Facts are facts.

And how you define items in the quotes you cite
My definitions? No.

I quoted how Trumbull himself defined the requirement. And I quoted the U.S. Secretaries of State, who also took Trumbull at his word.

The question is... why won't YOU? What's stopping you from taking Trumbull and the U.S. Secretaries of State at their word? It seems it's only your "opinion" that's stopping you from accepting factual truth.

I'll pose the same question to you I just asked of djmilf... Cite any federal law or Constitutional Amendment which states without restriction that all children born in the U.S. are U.S. citizens.

You can't do it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2013, 12:53 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,800 posts, read 44,594,609 times
Reputation: 13625
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
The Secretaries of State determinations have no WEIGHT OF LAW.
The State Dept IS in fact authorized to make citizenship determinations. Recent case:
In vitro babies denied U.S. citizenship
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2013, 12:55 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,808,044 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
My definitions? No.

I quoted how Trumbull himself defined the requirement. And I quoted the U.S. Secretaries of State, who also took Trumbull at his word.

The question is... why won't YOU? What's stopping you from taking Trumbull and the U.S. Secretaries of State at their word? It seems it's only your "opinion" that's stopping you from accepting factual truth.

I'll pose the same question to you I just asked of djmilf... Cite any federal law or Constitutional Amendment which states without restriction that all children born in the U.S. are U.S. citizens.

You can't do it.
YOU quoted Trumbull talking about American Indians. And you blithely applied that more broadly.

And the Secretaries of State determinations have no WEIGHT of LAW.

I do take Trumbull at his word, that he was talking about American Indians when he made that comment.

And I already answered the question you asked of djmilf.

Why won't you tell us how you define "PERMANENT DOMICILE"? Not "domicile". "PERMANENT DOMICILE". YOUR definition.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2013, 12:55 PM
 
8,392 posts, read 7,354,917 times
Reputation: 8707
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Cite any federal law or Constitutional Amendment which states without restriction that all children born in the U.S. are U.S. citizens. You can't do it. I'm not the one arguing proof of the part, YOU are.
I have cited the 14th amendment. You've presented your own definition of the phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' that you tortured into existence from a taken-out-of-context statement made by Senator Lyman Trumbull and recorded in the congressional record. It's a definition that has no standing except in your own mind and in the minds of your fellow believers.

And I will point out that there is precedent for ignoring your citing of Senator Trumbull's statement, twisted or not. In District of Columbia v Heller, Associate Antonin Scalia wrote the majority opinion for the decision in which he explicitly discounted the record of congressional deliberations that took place when crafting the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

...

Now to the question that you either cannot or will not answer...

Why does a foreign mother who is 8 or 9 months pregnant risk a dangerous and possibly life-threatening border crossing in order to give birth to her child within the United States?

Because by giving birth within the United States, the non-citizen mother obtains for her child a certificate of live birth. A certificate of live birth is one of four pieces of identification that the federal government accepts as proof of United States citizenship. This birth certificate does not require that the child's parents both be United States citizens nor does it require that either of the parents have established permanent residency. It simply confirms that the child was born in a specific place and at a specific time.

This is why the mother risks her life and the life of her child. She knows what you refuse to accept.

Not only am I rejecting your opinion, but note that, in accepting a birth certificate as proof of citizenship, the entire governmental structure of the United States rejects your opinion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2013, 12:57 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,808,044 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
The State Dept IS in fact authorized to make citizenship determinations. Recent case:
In vitro babies denied U.S. citizenship
Which has no WEIGHT OF LAW. Their determinations are not LAW.

And the in-vitro babies weren't genetically linked to the birth mother. I agree with the mother that the State Department was wrong, again, and that their determination ignores modern medical and technological advances.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2013, 01:00 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,800 posts, read 44,594,609 times
Reputation: 13625
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Children born into diplomatic families and children born of invading armies are the exceptions.
Doesn't say that:

14th Amendment:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States"

8 USC § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth:

"The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"


U.S. Secretaries of State:

Secretary of State Frederick Frelinghuysen determined Ludwig Hausding, though born in the U.S., was not born a U.S. citizen because he was subject to a foreign power at birth having been born to a Saxon subject alien father.

Similarly, Secretary of State Thomas Bayard determined Richard Greisser, though born in Ohio, was not born a U.S. citizen because Greisser's father, too, was an alien, a German subject at the time of Greisser's birth. Bayard specifically stated that Greisser was at birth 'subject to a foreign power,' therefore not "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Digest of the International Law of the United States
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2013, 01:04 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,800 posts, read 44,594,609 times
Reputation: 13625
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
YOU quoted Trumbull talking about American Indians.
Here is where words matter:
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
IF he had said "Indian Nations" you would have a point. But he didn't. He specifically said "anybody else" AND "some other government."

"The provision is, that ‘all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.’ That means ‘subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.’ What do we mean by ‘complete jurisdiction thereof?’ Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means."

Congressional Record:
http://memory.loc.gov/ll/llcg/073/0000/00152893.tif

Trumbull's role in drafting and introducing the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the 14th Amendment:
Committee History

"It cannot be said of any Indian who owes allegiance, partial allegiance if you please, to some other Governmentthat he is 'subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.' "
http://memory.loc.gov/ll/llcg/073/0000/00152893.tif
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2013, 01:06 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,808,044 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Doesn't say that:

14th Amendment:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States"

8 USC § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth:

"The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"


U.S. Secretaries of State:

Secretary of State Frederick Frelinghuysen determined Ludwig Hausding, though born in the U.S., was not born a U.S. citizen because he was subject to a foreign power at birth having been born to a Saxon subject alien father.

Similarly, Secretary of State Thomas Bayard determined Richard Greisser, though born in Ohio, was not born a U.S. citizen because Greisser's father, too, was an alien, a German subject at the time of Greisser's birth. Bayard specifically stated that Greisser was at birth 'subject to a foreign power,' therefore not "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Digest of the International Law of the United States
"Subject to the jurisdiction thereof". The people born in the United States that aren't subject to the jurisdiction of the United States are children born into diplomatic families, and children born of members of invading armies. In Trumbull's time, American Indians born in the United States were also not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. All three did not owe their allegiance to the United States. Any and all children not members of this group, born on US soil, do owe their allegiance to the United States. Hence, birthright citizenship. We practice birthright citizenship in the United States. That's why we have "anchor babies". You can stomp your feet and moan and groan all you want, but we practice birthright citizenship in the United States.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2013, 01:06 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,800 posts, read 44,594,609 times
Reputation: 13625
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmilf View Post
I have cited the 14th amendment. You've presented your own definition of the phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof'
No, I cited Trumbull's own definition of the requirement:
Quote:
"The provision is, that ‘all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.’ That means ‘subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.’ What do we mean by ‘complete jurisdiction thereof?’ Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means."

Congressional Record:
http://memory.loc.gov/ll/llcg/073/0000/00152893.tif

Trumbull's role in drafting and introducing the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the 14th Amendment:
Committee History
"Not owing allegiance to anybody else"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:43 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top