Online users
???: MessageBartb: Message  

I hope the President sticks to his policy decision on the 14th Amendment, it is challenged, and it reaches the SCOTUS.
Post Reply   Forum

Posted by: TEEBONE ®

11/03/2018, 23:35:34

Author Profile Mail author Edit

Changing 14th Amendment? Here’s the math - WND

3-4 minutes

Can the president change the 14th Amendment by executive order? Of course not. Can the president change a law by executive order? Of course not, as was seen when Obama tried to change immigration laws by executive order.

But there is a catch. The U.S. Supreme Court has never defined or clarified “under the jurisdiction thereof” as stated in the 14th Amendment. The president and/or Congress may try to define it not to include illegal immigrants and their children as being under the jurisdiction of the United States, that they are under the jurisdiction of their originating countries. That would certainly be challenged at SCOTUS for a decision – but it is a viable option not open for popular vote, only for a high-court decision.

The 14th Amendment was never intended to be used as a loophole for immigrants to gain citizenship for children who could then act as “anchors” to keep their parents living in America. It was meant to allow slaves and their children to become citizens. The amendment needs to be clarified because of the worldwide immigration problem. All industrialized countries except Canada have reversed their laws on granting citizenship to children of immigrants who are born on their soil. And even Canada has requirements for birthright citizenship. The USA needs to do the same.

Will 38 states step up to amend that 14th Amendment? Yes, probably. The states already amended it once with the 26th Amendment. (The 14th was a very poorly written amendment.) Blue states may not agree to such a change – and they are the large states that vote for Democrats, about 10 of them. They are those same states that gave Hillary Clinton the popular vote. But neutral states and red states number about 40. States like Michigan and New Jersey and Minnesota will also vote to make such a change. Check out a map. Probably all states that voted for Trump plus purple states will agree to a change – especially any industrialized states with large numbers of manufacturing employees who have been hurt by immigration.

Will red states agree to amend the Second Amendment to gain support from blue states to amend the 14th? Red states don’t need to do that. Sixty percent of the states are already red. They have red legislatures and/or red governors. And those 10 liberal states could never get 38 states to agree to change the Second Amendment.

In the amendment process, the size of the state does not matter. Thirty-eight states are needed, and the populations in those 38 could be less than the population of the remaining 12. Article V of the Constitution provides the method for amendments, one that is not a democratic process. This is a republic with 50 sovereign states, of which 38 are needed to change the binding contract (Constitution). 38. Any size states. And that’s all.

Quintessential Phorto

A constitutional amendment is unnecessary.

The author of the amendment said specifically that children born of parents in the U.S. whose fealty was to a foreign sovereign are not American citizens. That is a matter of record.

Following the cue of the analysis from D.C. v. Heller, i.e. considering both the text and the history of the amendment to reach a ruling, given the current makeup of the Court it is not a stretch to expect that it would hold that the President is correct in his interpretation, and that he in fact didn't "change" the amendment as is being alleged.

Chief Justice Roberts is a wild card, however. He seems to be "evolving" into another Kennedy.

We shall see.


Democrats wouldn't buy a clue if it was government subsidized.

Modified by TEEBONE at Sun, Nov 04, 2018, 09:42:19

Post Reply | Recommend | Alert View All   Previous | Next | Current page

Replies to this message