We all agree. Babies born in the USA are US citizens. ? Not so fast…..

@wildgrass said
Oh maybe it's the other thread on the same topic where a bunch of you MAGA want SCOTUS to "rule" on ending birthright citizenship.

Courts interpret the constitution not manage immigration policy. If the concern is visa abuse that's an executive branch issue.

There you go...SCOTUS could INTERPRET the 14th Amendment to exclude people just passing through or coming to the country for a few weeks just to have a baby and fraudulently claim citizenship, pointing out that that's not what the Founding Fathers had in mind.. I could see that.

@Cliff-Mashburn said
There you go...SCOTUS could INTERPRET the 14th Amendment to exclude people just passing through or coming to the country for a few weeks just to have a baby and fraudulently claim citizenship, pointing out that that's not what the Founding Fathers had in mind.. I could see that.

The founding fathers didn't write it, nor should we need to guess the intent. All persons born here are citizens. If it can be interpreted in another way I'm not sure that person has sound mind.

The scenario you describe is silly and surely not the intent of whoever wrote the 14th amendment. But that's not SCOTUS job to change what is so clearly written into the constitution.

@wildgrass said
The founding fathers didn't write it, nor should we need to guess the intent. All persons born here are citizens. If it can be interpreted in another way I'm not sure that person has sound mind.

The scenario you describe is silly and surely not the intent of whoever wrote the 14th amendment. But that's not SCOTUS job to change what is so clearly written into the constitution.

My bad, it was later.
So...What?
Do you think in 1868 they knew there would be people swarming into America just to have kids as anchor babies?
I'll answer it for you.
NO.
No, they did not. They had no concept of the ease that people could travel thousands of miles in a few days or even hours.

@Cliff-Mashburn said
There you go...SCOTUS could INTERPRET the 14th Amendment to exclude people just passing through or coming to the country for a few weeks just to have a baby and fraudulently claim citizenship, pointing out that that's not what the Founding Fathers had in mind.. I could see that.

They've already shown that they can't interpret ANYthing except through the lens of Trump's narcissism.

@no1marauder said
They're not "granted" anything, they are US citizens by operation of the Constitution of this country.

And it's a good thing. Our birth rate is dangerously low and money is being sent to surrogate parents and agencies.

So what's the problem?

The problem, as they see it, is that most of the babies born in this country of immigrant parents are not white.

Racists be rabid in these parts.

@Cliff-Mashburn said
Two illegal aliens having a baby in the country should not produce an American citizen.
It should produce a third illegal alien.

How, in the name of God, does it hurt you personally to have a child of immigrants be a US citizen? It doesn't take your citizenship away, it doesn't take food out of your mouth, it doesn't make you sell your home, it doesn't do ANYthing to you.

You are, however, a victim of your own hatred. How do you sleep at night?

@Cliff-Mashburn said
SCOTUS can't make amendments to the constitution.
Did you not listen in your high school civics class?

Did the SC Justices?

@AverageJoe1 said
You most certainly did not. A one sentence answer would be fine, should these surrogated children be granted citizenship. Actually a one word answer is what we are looking for a yes or a no. Your loyal disciple Suzanne is watching And needs someone to look up to. I hope you will not embarrass yourself.

You heard him, GFY.

@AverageJoe1 said
This is what you answered with. So I was naturally detoured into what “constitution says”.. I asked lib Marauder what HE HE HE thinks about our country making deposited ,,,yes, deposited…..children full citizens.

Still won’t tell us what he thinks. This is the mindset, the gear set, of a bot. Bots don’t think for themselves.

I win. Your time is up. Win.

ONE person should not be the basis of US law, either.

Read the Preamble some time. The intention is clear. The COMMON good of all Americans.

@AverageJoe1 said
What do our laws say? Why don’t you tell us? What article? 14th doesn’t mention invaders. An invader, say a Mozambican or some other person from 193 countries? Say What?!? Lille feller?
Say it. Say foreign nationals from any country should be able to claim citizenship for any child born here, inluding one hundred children carried by surrogates.. Say it. Marauder only quotes his books.

The far bigger concern here is that racist Americans like you, like others on this forum, consider these immigrants INVADERS. What that is, is hyperbole, in the extreme. All because these people (yes, they are people, it is shocking that I have to remind you) are NOT WHITE. THAT is what your problem with this is.

Isolationism is not good for America. Or Americans.

@AverageJoe1 said
Me? Are you writing about me again? Did you catch the points in my post and respond to them. What about the businessman having many babies that become citizens of the United States of America ?Are you for or against it?

Not that I care about what you think, but since you asked I'll tell you.

I believe immigration of all kinds benefits America. We are simply NOT a nation of only white people. Diversity (yes, I know you hate the concept) is America's strength. This INVASION, as you keep calling it, is simply a Trumpublican figment of your somewhat limited imagination.

@Cliff-Mashburn said
My bad, it was later.
So...What?
Do you think in 1868 they knew there would be people swarming into America just to have kids as anchor babies?
I'll answer it for you.
NO.
No, they did not. They had no concept of the ease that people could travel thousands of miles in a few days or even hours.

There's no way you're saying that SCOTUS should reword the amendment based on current events?

They can't do that.

@Cliff-Mashburn said
There you go...SCOTUS could INTERPRET the 14th Amendment to exclude people just passing through or coming to the country for a few weeks just to have a baby and fraudulently claim citizenship, pointing out that that's not what the Founding Fathers had in mind.. I could see that.

Your common sense and logic just make them go deeper into an abyss with which we are not familiar.
Because,,,,,they have no where else to go. One of them accosted my granny at the 5andDime Store,, and told her a man can become a woman. Luckily she had mace at the ready!!!!

@wildgrass said
There's no way you're saying that SCOTUS should reword the amendment based on current events?

They can't do that.

Ahhhh the mystery. Like the mystery of the 50-year-old case about aborting children at the federal level!!!!! The mysterious cloak lifted, it was magically reworded!!

Say I like being a liberal, I like being a liberal, 10 times!,!

@AverageJoe1 said
Ahhhh the mystery. Like the mystery of the 50-year-old case about aborting children at the federal level!!!!! The mysterious cloak lifted, it was magically reworded!!

Say I like being a liberal, I like being a liberal, 10 times!,!

You're analogy only makes sense if there were a constitutional amendment that reads "abortion is illegal" verbatim.