Robert’s and Barrett did as expected
(twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (81)
sorted by:
No, because the sentence fragment you're hyper-focusing is part of a sentence that clearly specifies 'citizens' in the part of the sentence you're ignoring. Meanwhile, a totally different sentence adresses the anchor babies question. You're twisting things like a lawyer here.
This?
What exactly am I ignoring?
The part where men creating a nation never thought things would get so retarded that they would have to painstakingly detail basic concepts like nation and citizen. No one arguing your side of this debate legitimately thinks that any author of the constitution would ever condone birthright citizenship. It's a disingenuous debate hinging upon tortured semantics, and it is doubly infuriating coming from people who flout the constitution itself at every turn. Why are we even entertaining traitors who declare whole cities to be sanctuaries from the very laws they abuse?
Ironically, this is something where the leftist idea of "IT WAS A DIFFERENT TIME, IT DOESN'T COUNT" would actually hold some water. It was a different time, because to go to America, you had to go on a ship with a 10% mortality rate, pay a lot and wait weeks. Now you can just get a plane ticket and have a quick, ultrasafe journey. They probably couldn't even imagine the idea of 'anchor babies', because the thing wasn't even practical at the time.
Wait, do you actually think that I support birthright citizenship? You know that not a single European country has this, right?
Subject to the jurisdiction thereof. This excluded citizens of other nations, who were subject to those jurisdictions. By the understanding of the time, it was a means to avoid having a bunch of stateless residents.
Aren't you subject to the jurisdiction by mere fact of being there? If a citizen of Belarus goes to the US, he will be prosecuted, not delivered back to Belarus for jurisdiction.
I remember researching this at the time because this sounded vaguely plausible, but AFAIK this is diplomats and Indian tribes.
As I said, by the understanding of the time. Basically, consider a hypothetical that if you run into trouble over here, you can turn to your home's embassy for help. You have a home jurisdiction that you are a subject of and you are only a visitor here.