WFFaithful
Well-known member
Trump wants to end birthright citizenship.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-trump-idUSKCN1VB21B
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-trump-idUSKCN1VB21B
That article omits the “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” language of the 14th Amendment. There is an argument that that language means that the 14th Amendment does not require birthright citizenship for children of undocumented aliens.
The argument being made is that the purpose of this language in the 14th Amendment was to overrule Dred Scott, which had held that slaves could not be US citizens, and provide that former slaves, most of whom by the 1860s had been born in the US, were, in fact, US citizens. The language was not so broad, however, as to make Native Americans citizens, despite being born in the US, because they were subject to the jurisdiction of their tribe.
Originalism doesn’t lionize the founding fathers. It just says the constitution means what it meant at the time it was ratified, which is hardly a novel proposition in law, or life.
Are you suggesting the 2nd amendment should only protect 18th century firearms? Because in that case, consider me an originalist.
In 1924, Congress enacted the Indian Citizenship Act, which made Native Americans US citizens, so, fortunately, Elizabeth Warren can be president.
You might want to re-read Heller.