Constitution doesn’t mandate birthright citizenship

[Alcott]

Does Mexico have citizenship by birth?

 

[Lewis]

Does Mexico have citizenship by birth?

Birthright citizenship is legal in Mexico, although it is not a great magnet for those who would seek entitlements.

"]Food assistance programs have little effect on the extent of poverty in
Mexico, while the opposite is true in the United States, primarily because the level of benefits as a percentage of income is much lower in Mexico and a much higher percentage of eligible households receive benefits from food assistance programs in the United States."

 

[777]

No, that's Mexican nationality that's conferred by birth on Mexican soil NOT citizenship. They are distinguishable entities in that country.

Canada has the citizenship by birth thing, too - this controversy should be addressed again by the courts IMO.

 

[Jedi Knight]

If their parents are here illegally, that should be more than enough to squash their claim to birth rights. Their parents are invading enemies and invaders have no rights.

CNN blocked me from posting on their FB for saying Anchor Babies!! Politically Correctness watch out for Trump!!!

 

[wpe3bql]

Our Constitution has already been amended to nullify a previous amendment that placed limits on the production, distribution, sale, and consumption of certain alcoholic beverages.

If our Constitution has already been amended to do what it did with regard to "Prohibition," then it also can be amended to change anything within its contents---including the powers it grants to both the legislative, executive, or the judicial branches of our federal government.

I'm not necessarily in agreement with amending our Constitution with regard to whom the OP's statements, but if the federal government has the power to grant US to whomever it wishes to do so (Which it does.) then, by that same token, it also has the authority to take away US citizenship to whomever it chooses to do so (Which it has done so in some cases.).

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Here's a question....


If the 14th amendment guaranteed birthright citizenship, how's come American Indians didn't become citizens until 1924 ?

 

[Crabtownboy]

Here's a question....


If the 14th amendment guaranteed birthright citizenship, how's come American Indians didn't become citizens until 1924 ?

Because reservations were and are not part of the United States. Before 1924 kids born on a reservation were not automatically considered US citizens.

The Supreme Court ruled in an 1884 case (Elk v. Wilkins) that an Indian born on a reservation did not acquire United States citizenship at birth (because he was not subject to U.S. jurisdiction) and could not claim citizenship later on merely by moving to non-reservation U.S. territory and renouncing his former tribal allegiance.[54] (Indians were subsequently granted citizenship by an act of Congress in 1924.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Because reservations were and are not part of the United States. Before 1924 kids born on a reservation were not automatically considered US citizens.

You are leaving a lot out of your answer.

First, very far from all Indians were born on reservations.

Second, in that ruling, SCOTUS said...."[N]o one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent."

 

[Crabtownboy]

You are leaving a lot out of your answer.

First, very far from all Indians were born on reservations.

Second, in that ruling, SCOTUS said...."[N]o one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent."

Because they were members of tribes and the tribes were considered independent nations, or as the SC said "domestic dependent nations.

Because Native Americans are citizens of their tribal nations as well as the United States, and those tribal nations are characterized under U.S. law as "domestic dependent nations", a special relationship exists which creates a particular tension between rights granted via tribal sovereignty and rights that individual Natives retain as U.S. citizens. This "dual citizen" status creates tension within the U.S. colonial context even today, but was far more extreme before Natives were uniformly granted U.S. citizenship in 1924.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_civil_rights

The court ruled that those who had been born on a reservation could not claim citizenship by simply moving off the reservation. That changed in 1924.

The SC has also rules prior to 1924 that:

Additionally, American Indians were not originally recognized as citizens, since Indian tribes were considered to be outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. government.

The Supreme Court ruled in an 1884 case (Elk v. Wilkins) that an Indian born on a reservation did not acquire United States citizenship at birth (because he was not subject to U.S. jurisdiction) and could not claim citizenship later on merely by moving to non-reservation U.S. territory and renouncing his former tribal allegiance.[

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, also known as the Snyder Act, was proposed by Representative Homer P. Snyder (R) of New York and granted full U.S. citizenship to America's indigenous peoples, called "Indians" in this Act. (The Fourteenth Amendment already defined as citizens any person born in the U.S., but only if "subject to the jurisdiction thereof"; this latter clause excluded anyone who already had citizenship in a foreign power such as a tribal nation.) The act was signed into law by President Calvin Coolidge on June 2, 1924.[1][2][3] It was enacted partially in recognition of the thousands of Indians who served in the armed forces during World War I.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Citizenship_Act

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Because they were members of tribes and the tribes were considered independent nations, or as the SC said "domestic dependent nations.

And with that, you have proved the point that "birthright citizenship" does not, CAN not exist under the 14th amendment.

 

[Crabtownboy]

And with that, you have proved the point that "birthright citizenship" does not, CAN not exist under the 14th amendment.

The 14th amendment clarified birthright citizenship and threw out restrictions that were in place prior to that decision. Read it and maybe you will understand.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I've read it. And I agree with you....


Put it this way...

you say "Because they were members of tribes and the tribes were considered independent nations, or as the SC said "domestic dependent nations." is the reason Indians did not get "birth citizenship.

I say....

"Because they are Mexicans, and Mexico is considered to be an independent nation.

What's the difference?

 

[Crabtownboy]

I've read it. And I agree with you....


Put it this way...

you say "Because they were members of tribes and the tribes were considered independent nations, or as the SC said "domestic dependent nations." is the reason Indians did not get "birth citizenship.

I say....

"Because they are Mexicans, and Mexico is considered to be an independent nation.

What's the difference?

Now you are a smart fellow. You can surely figure it our with a bit of thinking.

Have a blessed evening.

 

[Zaac]

This must be lose your mind week in the GOP. Did the RNC not discuss with Trump and the others about keeping the dirty little family secrets about the GOP thinking that this is THEIR country and how they plan to take it back?

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Now you are a smart fellow. You can surely figure it our with a bit of thinking.

Have a blessed evening.

That's your way of saying "there is none"

We all knew that.