Yesterday, I had the pleasure of speaking at the Constitution Day event at James Madison University about “Rage and the Republic.” and various constitutional issues. During the event, organized by the James Madison Center on Civic Engagement, one student asked me what I would change about the U.S. Constitution. I said that I would amend the Constitution to eliminate birthright citizenship, as have other nations who once followed this ill-considered practice. Well, Sen. Rand Paul (R., Kentucky) has wasted no time. He just reintroduced his bill to ban birthright citizenship.
I have previously written about the possible need for such an amendment after the decision in Trump v. Barbara.
With that decision, the matter now rests not with the court but with the country. We have never truly had a national debate over the practice. The basis and future of birthright citizenship have remained matters almost exclusively for the courts.
Most countries in the world reject this controversial policy. Our closest allies in Europe reject birthright citizenship and follow the common practice of “jus sanguinis,” or right of blood. We are part of a smaller number of countries following “jus soli,” or right of soil.
Various countries that once followed the practice later amended their constitutions or laws to get rid of it. That is what would need to be done with a 28th amendment.
It is time that we have a civil and substantive debate over birthright citizenship in the United States. Given that the states are Democratic-controlled, it is unlikely that an amendment would pass; as noted, we have never been given this decision at the national level. Even with the 14th Amendment’s ratification in 1868, there were differing views on the meaning of the critical line: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
Both sides have good-faith arguments, but the time for that debate is long overdue.
Here is the language of the amendment:
JOINT RESOLUTIONProposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to protect United States citizenship.
That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:
“article —“Section 1. For purposes of the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States, a person may be considered to be ‘subject to the jurisdiction of the United States’ only in accordance with section 2.
“Section 2. A person born in the United States may only be considered ‘subject to the jurisdiction of the United States’ if the person is born in the United States of parents, one of whom is—
“(1) a citizen or national of the United States;
“(2) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States whose residence is in the United States; or
“(3) an alien with lawful status under the immigration laws performing active service in the Armed Forces.
“Section 3. Congress shall have the power to carry out this article through appropriate legislation.”
All you need is #1.
Roberts ruling on birthright citizenship made zero sense logically. He acknowledged multiple elements (two) to satisfy citizenship under the 14th: birth in AND “subject to the jurisdiction”.
However, he goes on to equate these two elements by saying that someone born in the US is subject to the jurisdiction. If this were the case then there would be absolutely no need to state both elements, the amendment would have simply said everyone born in the US becomes a citizen.
This is absolutely flawed logic. Furthermore, if you research the papers, arguments and speeches surrounding the creation of the amendment, it becomes clear that birth alone was never the intention.
ANYONE who cannot read and/or comprehend the messages that were written in defense of the 14th Amendment, that CLEARLY defined the meaning of said amendment, is either: 1. A Demonrat trying to lie to everyone else, or 2. A complete idiot who knows nothing of the formation of the Constitution and the 14th Amendment, or 3. Some combination thereof, and/or a person who is intently trying to destroy the Republic, and lastly 4. A Complete idiot who knows nothing of Civics, the Constitution, personal responsibility, or what it means to be an American–and to that person I say you do not deserve the right to vote, in any election anywhere, ever. GFY
Robert fits criteria 4
#. Let’s take a moment to think about Barrett, Kavanaugh and Roberts who gave us Hasan Piker. His parents obtained a birth cert and left for Turkey where Piker was lived until he returned with cert in hand. They nor he resided in the US. How Pikers are there. Mr. Paul’s amendment doesn’t address that error. Please see the language in the 14th. In which they reside. Check Websters , Justice Roberts.
^^^ * How many Pikers are there? Willy Wonka
I belive that birthright should be granted only if at least one paent is a US citizen and has been for at least five years prior to the date of birth. If one of the parents has alliegence to another country, that should eliminate birthright citizenship. That alleigence can be rejected by a sworn oath before an immigation Judge.
Agreed. Rand’s amendment doesn’t fix anything. It just creates loopholes.
I would support the proposed change but in the meantime it would be nice if they laid off the ICE thuggery and also the overweening executive policies that are cancelling laws passed by Congress. Bad enough the Democrats would not enforce the border, now this guy is trying to cancel asylum and other programs which he has no authority to do
A. Noni Mouse
If anything ICE efforts should be incresed and remove every person from the USA that does not have government permission to be in the country legally. You can not build a strong country when you reward forieners that make their first act a criminal one. USA first and only first!
An asylum quota by law has been exceeded as an understatement. The executive has national security to implement as Americans have been killed and murdered and other.
Don’t exaggerate. Nobody is trying to stop asylum, just restrict eligibility. No laws are broken. ICE has a job to do. If you don’t like it then go to DC and change the laws.
Where were you when there was just as many complaints about ice under obama?
Just close the jails and send all cops home. Brilliant! Not so much!
Had Trump done what he campaigned on, which was deporting anyone Biden let in, we’d be winning the midterms by 30 points.
Trump is deporting illegal aliens that bribem let in! Ya gotta find them first, and then get around the activist judges obstructions!
The new interpretation of citizenship is new. In 50 years or maybe 25 no one will remember. So it is.
If one were to subtract the Anonymous troll posts, the post count here would be half, at least. I do not understand the reticence on the part of our hosts. No sane website allows this level of co-opting. And it sure is annoying. Eventually, and inevitably, it will drive visitors away.
Sigh. Typo. Please give us a legitimate way to log in. WordPress is a dumpster fire.
Its not as if your stupid comments have anything of interest to add. Daily you screech hate towards other Americans. You’re a clown, get lost you hatemonger.
Clown Anon
LOL!! You are looking in a mirror as you whine. demoncrap wokies are the haters loud and clear. Funny you said in a prior post “……it would be nice if they laid off the ICE thuggery………and in a following post you whined “If anything ICE efforts should be increased and remove every person from the USA…..” who is not legally allowed to be here. Are you sure you know what you are saying, have you been drinking, or do you just like to hear yourself whine?
You are a bot.
It’s pure free speech. I guess allowing even the trolls to post nonsense and crazy stuff is what Turley supports. Or Darren quit his job and Turley is in the process of hiring a new moderator.
ESTOVIR , posing as James, has the nerve to say ‘anonymous troll comments account for half of all the posts’.
In reality, ESTOVIR’S PUPPETS account for up to 3/4 of the posts on many days. Estovir also uses ‘Anonymous’ on a routine basis, in addition to multiple puppets per day.
Estovir’s activities have been going unchallenged for 6 years at this point. All these names that have become staples to readers have been Estovir all along.
Names like James, Upstate Farmer, Old Man From Kansas, Thinkthrough, Diogenes, Sam, Kirk, Whimsical Mama, Hullbobby, Steve Witherspoon.. They’re all part of a deliberate deception to fool Turley readers.
This ongoing deception has to end at some point. This forum would be far more interesting if all the commeters were real people making real arguments.
James,
Unfortunately, as the good professor is a free speech advocate, we have to suffer the annonys idiotic, moronic, juvenile comments.
I know the antidote to the annony is more, good speech, but unfortunately, now that I am in college, I just dont have the time.
It is quite obvious how bad it really has gotten as of late. I see it as two different things:
1) The good professor writing is spot on about the topics and those topics just so happen to make the far illiberal leftists look bad.
2) When the professor is spot on, the annonys/GSX/Gigi/Esquire/Wally etc. comment bomb the comments section with idiotic, moronic, juvenile, or very badly written AI content. Just reaffirms PT is right. And they are wrong.
Still it is sad to have to scroll past so many useless annony/GSX/Gigi/Esquire/Wally and see how such a good site go bad. At this point, I think I would rather see the professor just turn off the comments section.
Not only that, but the grammar and spelling are atrocious. We need to end birthright citizenship as it is understood now. Rand Paul finally put to paper (yes, “put to paper” is grammatically correct) what should be common sense. The trouble, as Mr. Turley rightfully pointed out, is that we are so divided that common sense won’t even be given a voice in the argument. Sad times. I hope we grow out of it.
There’s a missing piece Congress could get working on — a national Citizenship Verification database.
If newborns have to inherit US Citizenship from parents, how will eligibility be verified at the time of birth?
There’s also an application for voter eligibility. The logjam over the SAFE Act is there is no easy-to-use system to prove one’s US Citizenship.
Oh, and the new system must be fraud-proof, and have a means to quickly correct errors.
And, how about babies born on US soil NOT eligible? They need to have their Nationality determined, and Temporary Neonate Visas issued, so they can depart the country legally.
Rand Paul is a bit premature with this Constitutional Amendment. He, more than anyone, should understand the basic infrastructure doesn’t now exist to make his proposal a reality. Where’s the common sense?…it has left the building.
It’s all performative showboating. Neither Party knows how to govern anymore.
No matter what Rand Paul proposes it’s not going anywhere. Not with this Congress or the next one.
Are you predicting what you want to see happen, or what you don’t want to see happen?
Winners (high achievers) always voice the expectation of what they want, as opposed to making predictions.
That’s how they win.
Losers cast about verbally with cynicism, vagueness and impotence predicting failure.
There isn’t a post today, the 17th?
Rest assured Professor Turley is furiously searching the interwebs for something to pin on those crazy lefties and the scary socialists. There is bound to be a wild story out in the fringes.
Socialists and Communists are an exestential threat to the Republic. They have no place in a Constitutional Republic.
National referendum to change the Constitution.
But he doesn’t have the balls to pen all badly needed amendment to force term limits on everyone!!!!
If you think Congress is stupid. a Nationa Covention will make Congress look like a group with intelligence.
There are over million Chinese in China with US passports obtained via birth tourism racket. Ready to vote here at will. Isn’t a national security (survival) issue, yet?
You mean actual U.S. citizens? Hey, if they have valid American passports they can certainly vote.
File a case on birth tourism as it doesn’t meet RESIDE. One narrow issue. .