Loki wrote:
One more time, Paul, read my post on this thread. Elk v Wilkins1884 stated that John Elk was NOT a birth citizen, even though born on US soil because his parents were not citizens. The 14th was ratified in 1868, well before this ruling, so does not vitiate the SCOTUS decision. This is the part when you can't get much clearer than that. The author of the 14th Amendment's first section, Senator Jacob Howard of MI stated that the amendment was meant only to confer full citizenship rights on former slaves and their families, and did not apply to diplomatic personnel or those here illegally. In US v Wong Kim Ark1898, the Court ruled that Wong Kim Ark WAS a birth citizen, because his parents, while not citizens were permanent legal residents, (as opposed to foreigners here legally on a temporary visa) and therefore "subject to the jurisdiction." Senator Howard specifically stated that diplomats and others who were not citizens are not considered "subject to the jurisdiction" and are therefore any issue (children) have no claim on birthright citizenship. This is a civil rather than a criminal matter. I believe the Court's decision on "equal rights" for foreigners applies to criminal matters, although I will have to double check.
One more time, Paul, read my post on this thread. ... (
show quote)
Don't try to sneak that by us, you know that is BS.
Elk v. Wilkins[edit]
In Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884), the Supreme Court denied the birthright citizenship claim of an American Indian. The court ruled that being born in the territory of the United States is not sufficient for citizenship; those who wish to claim citizenship by birth must be born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. The court's majority held that the children of Native Americans were
no more "born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," within the meaning of the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment, than the children of subjects of any foreign government born within the domain of that government, or the children born within the United States of ambassadors or other public ministers of foreign nations.[47]
Thus, Native Americans who voluntarily quit their tribes would not automatically become U.S. citizens.[48] Native Americans were granted U.S. citizenship by Congress half a century later in the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, which rendered the Elk decision obsolete.
United States v. Wong Kim Ark[edit]
In the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), the Supreme Court ruled that a person who
is born in the United States
of parents who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of a foreign power
whose parents have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States
whose parents are there carrying on business and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity of the foreign power to which they are subject
becomes, at the time of his birth, a citizen of the United States by virtue of the first clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthright_citizenship_in_the_United_States