>>180124, >>180125, >>180126, >>180127, >>180128, >>180129, >>180130, >>180131, >>180132, >>180133, >>180134, >>180135, >>180136, >>180137, >>180138, >>180139, >>180140, >>180141, >>180142, >>180143, >>180144, >>180145, >>180146, >>180147, >>180148, >>180149, >>180150, >>180151, >>180152, >>180153, >>180154, >>180155, >>180156, >>180157, >>180158, >>180159, >>180160, >>180161, >>180162, >>180163, >>180164, >>180165, >>180166, >>180167, >>180168, >>180169, >>180170, >>180171, >>180172, >>180173, >>180174, >>180175, >>180176, >>180177, >>180178, >>180179, >>180180, >>180181, >>180182, >>180183, >>180184
You have to be within the jurisdiction of the United States, no other country.
Clearly, this would exclude children of aliens, legal or illegal.
Of course, we're talking about children of illegal aliens right now.
There's no evidence at all that the 14th Amendment's use of the phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to alter the meaning or the intent of the language in the 1866 Civil Rights Act.
Well, why did they change it?
Because it goes through a different process.
But they didn't change its intent or meaning. How do we know?
Because they said so.
Third, Senators Trumbull and Howard, remember them?
Two of the principal authors of the 1866 Civil Rights Act and the 14th Amendment stated that, quote, "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States means not owing allegiance to anybody else."
Got that? Allegiance.
How on earth is this an automatic grant of birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens?
It's not. And it was never intended to be.
Indeed, illegal aliens are by definition in the United States illegally.
That is in direct violation of federal law.
Does anybody actually believe - even if we play this game that the left is playing or some of the justices - does anybody actually believe that a foreigner can confer upon herself legal jurisdiction for the purpose of or even accidentally creating citizenship for a child born here?