By Whatever Interpretation

Greg Sargent should be issued a motor vehicle violation for turning a United States Senator into roadkill:

In other words, on birthright citizenship, Trump is completely full of bad-faith baloney, and you agree with "liberal politicians" on this. 

That's what you meant, right, Senator? https://t.co/cGFtN3GwmR

— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) November 2, 2018

In their recent op-ed in The Washington Post, Republican lawyer George Conway and Democratic lawyer Neal Katyal argued that in "the plain words of the 14th Amendment"

what they wrote was simple and clear. Both proponents and opponents of the language at the time knew exactly what it meant: Virtually anyone born in the United States is a citizen. In 1898, the Supreme Court affirmed just that: It held that the “Fourteenth amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory” — “including all children here born of resident aliens"....

They added

Whatever one may think of the merits of adding a further exception to the 14th Amendment's guarantee of birthright citizenship... the simple fact is that the amendment, as written, doesn't permit it.

This is unlike the 1st Amendment, the 2nd Amendment, and practically every other Amendment.  The relevant portion- Artice XIV, Section 1A- reads "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." 

No matter who her parents are and under what circumstances they came to the USA, the individual is subject to the laws of the USA. All persons in the country are, aside from those afforded diplomatic immunity. And if born here, she is a citizen, hands down.

Whether by "originalism," original intent, textualism, or perception of the Constitution as a living document, the 14th Amendment clearly requires the child of a legal or illegal immigrant be considered a citizen.

If Senator Rubio believes the Amendment should be modified or rescinded outright, he can initiate a process to do that, which would require an Amendment nullifying the 14th.  If he disagrees with the President's threats, he can denounce Mr. Trump's idea, and cite the President's name. Given Mr. Rubio's rather flaccid backbone, it is not in the offing.

Share |