Should we repeal ...?

Question

Should we repeal the 14th amendment (section 1)? It seems to me, that so much of the illegal immigration problems and the seperation of families because of the 14th amendment being misused that we should repeal it. It was set in place to help the children of slaves and establish their rights as citizens, not to establish the rights of children of illegal immigrants. So many people enter this country so their children can be born here and have all the "rights" of citizens without having to go through the process of becoming legal citizens. Do we really need that section to be misused and cause more harm than good?

Answer 1

No, the 14th amendment does not need to be repealed. It is fine just the way it is as long as it is interpreted the way its authors intended.

The question that needs to be asked is this:
Who is the IDIOT that said that anyone born on US soil is a citizen according to the 14th amendment? You will not find anyone. You will not find a Supreme Court decision or a decision of a lower court that made that determination.

The author of the citizenship clause of the 14th amendment, Senator Jacob Howard, was very clear about what constitutes citizenship. He said:

"The 14th amendment will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person"

Pretty clear to me. Will not include foreigners or aliens.

In addition, there was ample discussion by the 39th Congress on the citizenship clause of the 14th amendment to make it perfectly clear to anyone that granting birthright citizenship to the offspring of foreigners is, in fact, Unconstitutional.

Here is a link that goes into detail:
http://www.idexer.com/citizenship.htm

Answer 2

The 14th was worded clearly to prevent this from ever happening. But it did. I still don't know how.

The worst abomination of the clearly stated intentions of the 39th Congress shows up in Plyler vs. Doe (Plyler of Tyler) 1982.

In that case, the court decided 5-4 that the jurisdiction of children born of aliens and those born of citizens could not be distinguished between. In the opinion for the majority, Justice Beansmooch (can't think of his name) went so far as to show where he volunteered the taxpayer into his own convictions.

He basically just thought the poor li'l critters oughtta be edjikated rather than not since otherwise they'd be hurtin' fer certain.

So, right then and there, he wrote a multi-billion dollar check and signed our names to it.

Seriously, though, taxpayers:

I see only one solution and that is that, since there has NEVER been a stroke in the original constitution nor in any amendment stating how many justices to appoint, why don't we demand at least TEN JUSTICES PER CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT!!!!

And no more than 2 can have law degrees. I mean, all must have a solid education and be able to recite and understand a good repertoire of laws but no practicing attorneys. Sorry but we just can't do with ZERO common sense any longer.



qwerty

Answer 3

The 14th Ammendment has been misinterpreted from the begining. One that kind of surprises me is that P.A. Madison, in his 2005 writing of this, fails to make any mention of U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) In this case the Supreme Court held that a US-born child of Chinese immigrants was a US citizen (on account of the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause), even though his parents were not US citizens (and were, in fact, barred from naturalization under the Chinese Exclusion Acts). I wonder why such a scholarly man would miss something like that, or did he?

It would appear what Mr. Madison seems to be saying is that SCOTUS went off the reservation once again -- writing law when they should have been interpreting it. The problem is; we wouldn’t be discussing legislative history if the meaning of the COTUS text is clear.

Answer 4

Definately needs to have that loophole closed. Someone asked an interesting question that pertains to this since it's become obvious that people find a way around any rule......and that was what about people from another country who adopt an American child.....can they stay for the childs sake? I mean the way they're working this loophole why not? Kids an American citizen, can't deny the child the right of his citizenship....it could go to some pretty bizzare levels if they don't fix it.

Answer 5

Yes!
A true historical interpretation needs to be made. Shame on illegals trying to adopt the civil rights movement to justify their illegal occupation. Great question.

Answer 6

Yes I believe we should repeal the 14th. It has caused more negative results than good results.But I do no think it will happen.Great Question.

Answer 7

Yes it should be either repealed or at least changed.
Its purpose ( making sure children born in slavery arent denied citizenship ) is long gone.

Answer 8

No, the Constituition is not broken and further I think without significant continued immigration the US will find itself in a few generations with many of the same problems Europe has.

Answer 9

It needs to be repaired and quickly.