|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Second Amendment gun rights invoked in birthright citizenship debate
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
President Trump’s challenge this week to the long-held understanding that the Constitution guarantees citizenship to children born on U.S. soil, even if their mother was in the country illegally, has invoked another hotly debated constitutional right — to bear arms.
Gun control advocates have long questioned whether the Constitution’s seemingly straightforward Second Amendment “right of the people to keep and bear arms” really means that the lady next door can legally keep a semiautomatic rifle in her bedroom. Courts and constitutional scholars have long sided with gun rights advocates who say it does. |
| Comment by:
xqqme
(11/2/2018)
|
| Textualists? Not really. That ellipsis in the middle of their quote leaves out some pretty interesting clarifying language, including "and subject to the jurisdiction" of the US. For example, a baby born here of parent(s) from Mexico, who grows up and commits murder, then flees to Mexico to avoid prosecution and the death penalty, will NOT be extradited by Mexico on the basis of dual citizenship... so they are NOT subject to the jurisdiction of the USA, and therefore NOT citizens by birth. That particular issue is because Mexico's recognition of dual citizenship. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(11/2/2018)
|
xqqme - Like the Second Amendment, whose author and contemporaries made very clear that it protected a right of the people, not of the states, the author of the 14th Amendment's "subject to the jurisdiction" clause stated unequivocally that does not protect the children of aliens or of foreign diplomats.
Rep. John Bingham of Ohio, considered the father of the 14th Amendment, explained the language of the amendment this way: “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your constitution [sic] itself a natural born citizen…” - www.afa.net
"not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty" is the key. According to this clause's author, |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
