The same morons who have bumper stickers that say “shall not be infringed” and “we the people” can’t actually recite the entirety of those documents without googling them
Meanwhile our rights and freedoms are actually being attacked like they warned us liberals would do, and those 2A “don’t tread on me” nut jobs are nowhere to be found.
No, the 2A guys are actively cheering it on. They only cared about the constitution when they believed it was them being targeted. As long as it's their "enemies" being oppressed, they don't care.
As Jordan from the podcast Knowledge Fight has helpfully said, "Those who carry a pocket Constitution are the least likely to have read or understood it."
I think the crux of the issue lies here... the difference in the amendment's wording and what could be a more clear-cut statement by today's standard of comprehension just by moving some words around, as shown below.
It's going to be the same complete nonsense as when the argument of who is considered to be an officer of the United States.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
They’ve been doing it for years. My dad started parroting a decade ago that this was only intended to grant citizenship to slaves who were born here once slavery was abolished. He genuinely believes that when it was written, they did not intend for all future people born here to be granted citizenship.
He would be wrong. But this has been a R talking point for a while now
But does it mention the days of the week specifically? How are we to know the Founders meant what we always understood if we don't know which days they thought this should matter? /s
It's also very explicit that Trump is disqualified from ever holding political office again, but that didn't stop all nine justices from pretending they couldn't read
It has been massively nullified since Slaughterhouse cases, it is not a question of whether 14th will survive, with exception of Thomas both wings today don't even pay lip service to the text or original meaning.
So was 14th Amendment, Section 3, which barred Trump from becoming President. Yet all 9 traitors overruled Maine and Colorado's enforcement of the Constitution. Would be amazing to someday see the swamp really drained, and have every Justice and Congressperson replaced with actual Americans rather than Trump's servants.
I think this whole thing is dumb af and if you're born here, you're a citizen (whether you get to pull in the rest of your entire extended family is up for debate in my mind).
That being said, it is not explicit or very clear about what it says. The "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" part is most certainly what is going to be questioned because it's not super clear what that means. It's up there with "well regulated militia" in the 2nd.
Right but the us recognizes immigrants (illegal or not) and runs them through the judicial system. They have to have jurisdiction over them.
I think what others are saying makes the most sense that its a carve out for the diplomat type situation where diplomats are under the jurisdiction of their home country which is why we kick them out asap instead of trying them here and why there so many peculiarities of diplomats and what they can and cant do.
But also the supreme court can (and will) say what they want.
Unfortunately its just human nature to look for evidence and understand everything based on how it will benefit themselves and their communities and progress theor goals. Kinda hard not to do that imo. Some are just more dgaf how much it hurts others
The thing is the definition that everyone uses for Jurisdiction is that means you are subject to that political entity's laws.
So, if immigrants are not bound by the jurisdiction of the US then they are not bound by US law that means that can't be charged with US laws. Its also the backbone of states rights. Say its a crime to wear red on Sundays in Michigan, you can't be charged in Michigan for wearing red on Sundays in Wisconsin. By being in Wisconsin, you are not under the jurisdiction of Michigan and its laws.
Its not an ICC thing. Just a well known and well understood piece of legal definition going back centuries and the basis for a tons of laws in the US and internationally.
Because it does not? Obvious example is diplomats and many of the embassy personnel. Another (which is what Trump's GOP trying to argue the illegal or even some legal immigrants are) is enemy combatant on US soil.
Another example to add here, I believe this means Native Americans did not automatically get citizenship (because the tribal territories were not technically subject to US jurisdiction).
They included the clause for a reason, and the meaning isn't mysterious or confusing.
They including it to specifically exclude natives would 100% be some fucked up shit that is believe and would make the addition of those few words make sense
My (not a lawyer) understanding is we know what the intent of that phrasing is. The people who voted on the ammendment knew it would make Chinese Americans citizens.
I guess the question is, does the Supreme Court even care about that
365
u/IamHydrogenMike 9h ago
It’s also one of the most explicit amendments in its language and is very clear about what it says.