- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: SCOTUS will hear Birthright Citizenship case
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Then you should like Wong Kim Ark
I got no problem with Wong Kim Ark - haven't studied the details but read a synopsis and it seemed perfectly logical to me -
presuming I am referencing the same thing you are = are there two or more decisions with similar names?
0
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:07 pm to aTmTexas Dillo
quote:
we as a country are getting ever closer to a breaking point that started in Obama's second term
I agree with this part, but this part:
quote:
Barak, I know you said you were constitutionally bound in the first term to following the laws in regards to DACA but, we have this gray area in the 14th amendment in that you can open the border to illegal immigration and then the children born to the illegals are cemented here along with their families if we leave them alone. And we can just say "look at what the 14th Amendment says" to drown them out. And no, it didn't matter that indigenous Americans didn't get the benefit. That's okay. But they can be sued for negligence and tried for murder in our courts.
Is dumb. First off SCOTUS has never formally stated if DACA is legal or not, although it’s been essentially frozen since 2020. Second, SCOTUS shot down DAPA in US v Texas which would be the thing that deals with “anchor babies.” Obama deported more people in each of his terms than Trump did in his first, not sure how much he “left them alone.”
Unrelated tangent but I despise this straw man argument of “anchor babies” because having a US citizen child means literally nothing for probably 80% of illegals. If anything the idea of “anchor babies” applies more to Chinese and Middle Eastern wealthy people who come here while pregnant to have their baby so the baby can get citizenship.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:07 pm to aTmTexas Dillo
quote:You are tanking it for granted. By your logic abortion was safe because of Roe v Wade.
You argue for arguments sake. You know 2A is settled for your lifetime.
quote:I think Diana Ross is the only one left.
But 14 may not be settled because the Supremes took it.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:09 pm to Warboo
quote:Nah. Congress has a well-over 90% re-election rate. We love our government, apparently.
Our government which created entities that now enslave us to the ideals they see fit.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:12 pm to lionward2014
quote:Hopefully they would do the same if a president tried to remove the 1A or 2A by EO.
Because it’s a massive political hot button issue. It’s an easy way to bury it and clarify. There’s a reason they took it straight from the district court.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:14 pm to TrueTiger
quote:So a visitor from Afghanistan, would be under the jurisdiction of Sharia law, but not US Law? You sure you want that?
If you fell out of your mama on US ground but a foreign government could claim you as a citizen, The Prime jurisdiction that you were subject to was that foreign jurisdiction.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:20 pm to Taxing Authority
Sharia isn't a government.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:21 pm to TrueTiger
It's the law of the government you claim has jurisdiction, which means that it would be the law governing that person.
This post was edited on 12/5/25 at 9:21 pm
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:23 pm to TrueTiger
quote:Inded it’s not. But the idea that some drunk Afghani plows into a family, and the only redress would be to have them charged in an Afghanistan court seems kind of a bad deal.
Sharia isn't a government.
Do we really expect other nations to come here and enforce their laws on US soil? Seems worse than having illegal/ to me. YMMV.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
In the parlance of the time, subject to the jurisdiction thereof meant that the issue of the woman was solely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States government and no other.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:26 pm to TrueTiger
Why wouldn’t slaves be under the jurisdiction of their origin countries? Especially since they were here against their will.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:27 pm to Taxing Authority
You are confusing being a sovereign subject of a government with having to obey the laws and customs of whatever nation you physically find yourself in.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:29 pm to TrueTiger
quote:If I were you… I’d stay the hell away from Singapore.
You are confusing being a sovereign subject of a government with having to obey the laws and customs of whatever nation you physically find yourself in.
This post was edited on 12/5/25 at 9:30 pm
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:29 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
In the parlance of the time, subject to the jurisdiction thereof meant that the issue of the woman was solely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States government and no other.
If you read WKA, this is not an accurate description.
In the parlance of the time, "not being subject to the jurisdiction" meant 1 of 2 scenarios:
1. Being a diplomat/progeny of diplomats
2. Being held within an area of the US under hostile occupation
There was a 3rd set of persons who were included via jurisprudential precedent, Indians (via Elk v. Wilkins)
Any person not in those 3 groups was subject to the jurisdiction of the US.
quote:
In short, the judgment in the case of The Exchange declared, as incontrovertible principles, that the jurisdiction of every nation within its own territory is exclusive and absolute, and is susceptible of no limitation not imposed by the nation itself; that all exceptions to its full and absolute territorial jurisdiction must be traced up to its own consent, express or implied; that upon its consent to cede, or to waive the exercise of, a part of its territorial jurisdiction, rest the exemptions from that jurisdiction of foreign sovereigns or their armies entering its territory with its permission, and of their foreign ministers and public ships of war; and that the implied license, under which private individuals of another nation enter the territory and mingle indiscriminately with its inhabitants, for purposes of business or pleasure, can never be construed to grant to them an exemption from the jurisdiction of the country in which they are found.
quote:
The words 'in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,' in the first sentence of the fourteenth amendment of the constitution, must be presumed to have been understood and intended by the congress which proposed the amendment, and by the legislatures which adopted it, in the same sense in which the like words had been used by Chief Justice Marshall in the wellknown case of The Exchange, and as the equivalent of the words 'within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States,' and the converse of the words 'out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States,' as habitually used in the naturalization acts. This presumption is confirmed by the use of the word 'jurisdiction,' in the last clause of the same section of the fourteenth amendment, which forbids any state to 'deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' It is impossible to construe the words 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof,' in the opening sentence, as less comprehensive than the words 'within its jurisdiction,' in the concluding sentence of the same section; or to hold that persons 'within the jurisdiction' of one of the states of the Union are not 'subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.'
quote:
The foregoing considerations and authorities irresistibly lead us to these conclusions: The fourteenth amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens, with the exceptions or qualifications (as old as the rule itself) of children of foreign sovereigns or their ministers, or born on foreign public ships, or of enemies within and during a hostile occupation of part of our territory, and with the single additional exception of children of members of the Indian tribes owing direct allegiance to their several tribes. The amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born within the territory of the United States of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States. Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord Coke in Calvin's Case, 7 Coke, 6a, 'strong enough to make a natural subject, for, if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject'; and his child, as said by Mr. Binney in his essay before quoted, 'If born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle.' It can hardly be denied that an alien is completely subject to the political jurisdiction of the country in which he resides, seeing that, as said by Mr. Webster, when secretary of state, in his report to the president on Thrasher's case in 1851, and since repeated by this court: 'Independently of a residence with intention to continue such residence; independently of any domiciliation; independently of the taking of any oath of allegiance, or of renouncing any former allegiance,—it is well known that by the public law an alien, or a stranger born, for so long a time as he continues within the dominions of a foreign government, owes obedience to the laws of that government, and may be punished for treason or other crimes as a native-born subject might be, unless his case is varied by some treaty stipulations.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:30 pm to Taxing Authority
Guessing here, but they weren’t considered people in the legal sense. They were property. Essentially livestock.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:30 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
You are confusing being a sovereign subject of a government with having to obey the laws and customs of whatever nation you physically find yourself in.
You are confusing these 2, actually.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:33 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
In the parlance of the time, subject to the jurisdiction thereof meant that the issue of the woman was solely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States government and no other.
You are wrong.
From the 1870's census 2 years after teh 14th was ratified:
quote:
Every male person born within the United States, who has attained the age of 21 years, is a citizen of the United States by force of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution (act of February 10, 1855); also, all persons born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, whose fathers at the time of their birth were citizens of the United States, who have been declared by judgment of court to have been duly naturalized having taken out both “papers.
LINK
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:34 pm to SlowFlowPro
We have different opinions. I'm not here to be nasty or ugly about it.
And that's what makes the world go round.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:35 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
We have different opinions.
I posted historical data to support mine
Wong Kim Ark goes into an in-depth historical analysis of the meaning of the words at the time.
I posted only a snippet for you
This post was edited on 12/5/25 at 9:36 pm
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:49 pm to SlowFlowPro
Birth on U.S. soil alone is not enough for automatic citizenship; there must also be a meaningful allegiance or legal status forming a tie to U.S. political jurisdiction.
Page 11 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News