Featured Constitution doesn’t mandate birthright citizenship

Does Mexico have citizenship by birth?

 

Birthright citizenship is legal in Mexico, although it is not a great magnet for those who would seek entitlements.

"]Food assistance programs have little effect on the extent of poverty in
Mexico, while the opposite is true in the United States, primarily because the level of benefits as a percentage of income is much lower in Mexico and a much higher percentage of eligible households receive benefits from food assistance programs in the United States."

 

No, that's Mexican nationality that's conferred by birth on Mexican soil NOT citizenship. They are distinguishable entities in that country.

Canada has the citizenship by birth thing, too - this controversy should be addressed again by the courts IMO.

 

CNN blocked me from posting on their FB for saying Anchor Babies!! Politically Correctness watch out for Trump!!!

 

Our Constitution has already been amended to nullify a previous amendment that placed limits on the production, distribution, sale, and consumption of certain alcoholic beverages.

If our Constitution has already been amended to do what it did with regard to "Prohibition," then it also can be amended to change anything within its contents---including the powers it grants to both the legislative, executive, or the judicial branches of our federal government.

I'm not necessarily in agreement with amending our Constitution with regard to whom the OP's statements, but if the federal government has the power to grant US to whomever it wishes to do so (Which it does.) then, by that same token, it also has the authority to take away US citizenship to whomever it chooses to do so (Which it has done so in some cases.).

 

Here's a question....


If the 14th amendment guaranteed birthright citizenship, how's come American Indians didn't become citizens until 1924 ?

 

Because reservations were and are not part of the United States. Before 1924 kids born on a reservation were not automatically considered US citizens.

 

You are leaving a lot out of your answer.

First, very far from all Indians were born on reservations.

Second, in that ruling, SCOTUS said...."[N]o one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent."

 

Because they were members of tribes and the tribes were considered independent nations, or as the SC said "domestic dependent nations.

The court ruled that those who had been born on a reservation could not claim citizenship by simply moving off the reservation. That changed in 1924.

The SC has also rules prior to 1924 that:

 

And with that, you have proved the point that "birthright citizenship" does not, CAN not exist under the 14th amendment.

 

The 14th amendment clarified birthright citizenship and threw out restrictions that were in place prior to that decision. Read it and maybe you will understand.

 

I've read it. And I agree with you....


Put it this way...

you say "Because they were members of tribes and the tribes were considered independent nations, or as the SC said "domestic dependent nations." is the reason Indians did not get "birth citizenship.

I say....

"Because they are Mexicans, and Mexico is considered to be an independent nation.

What's the difference?

 

Now you are a smart fellow. You can surely figure it our with a bit of thinking.

Have a blessed evening.

 

This must be lose your mind week in the GOP. Did the RNC not discuss with Trump and the others about keeping the dirty little family secrets about the GOP thinking that this is THEIR country and how they plan to take it back?

 

That's your way of saying "there is none"

We all knew that.