Thread: 14th AMENDMENT - 'Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof'

Posted for current relevancy to the ongoing debate on amending the 14th Amendment to eliminate the loopholes for illegal alien anchor and "tourist" babies born in the United States to persons other than legal citizens of the United States.

============================================


What 'Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof' Really Means

The Federalist Blog
By P.A. Madison
Updated 8/10/09

Because the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendments first section was to end the denial of those fundamental rights that belong to all citizens by virtue of their citizenship under Article IV, Sec. II of the U.S. Constitution was imperative to first define citizenship of the United States. Otherwise, a State could refuse to recognize newly emancipated slaves as citizens by withholding the right to sue, make contracts, due process, purchase property, etc. Therefore, the Fourteenth Amendment acts to recognize all persons as citizens who do not owe allegiance to some other government when naturalized or born.

Perhaps the first most important thing to understand about national birthright is that there was no written national birthright rule applicable within the States prior to the year 1866. One will look in vain to find any national law on the subject prior to this year, or even any mention of the right to citizenship by birth under the United States Constitution.

One reason for the absence of an early written national birthright rule is that States had decided for themselves who were their citizens by virtue of being born within the limits of the State. Prior to the 14th amendment citizens of the United States were strictly defined as the citizens of each State.

After the Revolution, States retained only those portions of common law that were applicable to their local circumstances. In England at the time, every person born, with few exceptions such as children born of mix-parentage (they acquired the condition of their father if he was a freeman, else child acquired their mother’s citizenship) or diplomats within the realm of the King was considered a natural born subject under the maxim every man owes natural allegiance to the King. This allegiance was a personnel allegiance owed to the King personally, and such personal allegiance was never owed to any individual under the American system of States.

This natural allegiance was perpetual and difficult to severe or alter (Once a English subject, always a English subject) and was found odious in this country (America went to war against this “natural allegianceâ€

Amid immigration debate, Democrats battle GOP over Fourteenth Amendment

http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-1100045-.html#1100045

.

I'd say marching thru American streets carrying another countries' flag makes anchor babies "subject to the foreign power" of that country. They should take those flags and march right to the countries they glorify.

Thank You HAPPY2BME, a great read.

Hey miguelina......................................... yup! No need dropping your flag, take it with you.