There is nothing constitutional about birthright citizenship

“birthright Citizenship” as it is known is a lie created in the 1960’s (primarily by a push from Teddy Kennedy but mainly by immigration bureaucracy).  The intention was to facilitate changing the population as Teddy Kennedy knew they could not maintain the majority without adding new voters to the roles.  This began our long slide toward where we are going crazy on this issue – and shows why the democrats are so against the wall and for open borders.


People may not run across the border pop out a kid and declare it a citizen.  Citizenship must be granted by consent of the citizens.  The history below explains exactly how the constitution defends that right.


The key clause is known as the “Citizenship Clause” of the 14th amendment.  The first sentence is what must be understood.  It is “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the state wherein they reside.”


If there was any question on the meaning of the 14th amendment, here is directly from the congressional record.  The author of the citizenship clause explaining what it means on the floor of the U.S. Senate in 1866-

Mr. HOWARD: I now move to take up House joint resolution No. 127.

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, resumed the consideration of the joint resolution (H.R. No. 127) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

The first amendment is to section one, declaring that all "persons born in the United States and Subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside. I do not propose to say anything on that subject except that the question of citizenship has been fully discussed in this body as not to need any further elucidation, in my opinion. This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This 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 persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.


This was even more specifically added to by congress –


Under Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes, the same Congress who



Later “Subject to the jurisdiction thereof” was even further legally defined



In the year 1873 the United States Attorney General ruled the word
“jurisdiction” under the Fourteenth Amendment to mean, which Justice
Gray would recognize in Elk v. Wilkins years later:

The word “jurisdiction” must be understood to mean absolute and complete
jurisdiction, such as the United States had over its citizens before the
adoption of this amendment… Aliens, among whom are persons born here and naturalized abroad, dwelling or being in this country, are subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States only to a limited extent. Political and military
rights and duties do not pertain to them. (14 Op. Atty-Gen. 300.)

House Report No. 784, dated June 22, 1874, stated, “The United
States have not recognized a double allegiance. By our law a citizen is
bound to be ‘true and faithful’ alone to our government.” There is no way in
the world anyone can claim “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”
affirms the feudal common law doctrine of birth citizenship to aliens
because such doctrine by operation creates a “double allegiance” between
separate nations.

Aaron Sargent, a Representative from California during the
Naturalization Act of 1870 debates said the Fourteenth Amendment’s
citizenship clause was not a de-facto right for aliens to obtain
citizenship. No one came forward to dispute this conclusion.


The original intent of the 14th amendment is absolutely clear.  It was solely intended to make sure that freed black slaves were treated as equal citizens under state and federal law.  It was never intended in any way to include any kind of foreign national legal or otherwise.


In 1898, the Supreme Court ruled in the Wong Kim Ark case that children of LEGAL foreign residents where citizens.  While some consider this the “landmark” case, I believe this was an incorrect ruling based on original intent as defined above and should be overturned as well.  The Amendment never intended ANY foreign national child to be granted citizenship.


Section 5 of the 14th Amendment states “The congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. 


Congress has never made any law that specifies the legality of foreign nationals getting citizenship automatically.  Therefore, there should be no citizenship granted on children of foreign nationals legal or illegal.


Trump’s executive order is not changing the constitution at all.  IT is simply reinforcing what it says and forcing the legislature and the courts to recognize this and end the current practice. 


This action by itself has practically halted the caravan of invaders in its tracks.  Many are already going home or applying for citizenship in Mexico.






Recent Articles by Writers Ken follows.