Sen. Kay Hagan's Office Defends Birthright Citizenship

A couple of days ago, I called my two senators, whom supposedly represent the state of North Carolina, on their position of the upcoming immigration bill making its way through the upper chamber.  Both offices gave the same response.  Neither has an opinion because they anticipate many amendments will alter the bill.  Alright, that’s fair.

I stated that the bill being bandied about in the Senate is not true immigration reform, but just another version of the failed Simpson-Mazzoli Act.  Furthermore, the states’ must have the ability to enforce immigration laws, and that birthright citizenship must come to an end.  Besides, what good is border security when the commander-in-chief refuses to enforce current laws?  Senator Burr’s office thanked me for my input.  Senator Hagan’s would have none of it.

Her Democratic aide and I began a spirited debate on the finer points of the 14^th Amendment.  He instructed me that it would take a constitutional amendment to abolish birthright citizenship.  I informed him that the Supreme Court bastardized the intent and meaning of the 14^th, and that only Congress has the authority to set the rules for naturalization; not nine unelected judges.

What surprised me was his response, “The authors should have done a better job of writing the amendment.”  He further stated that only the words matter, not the context for which it was wrote.  Here is the matter of contention in Section One:

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. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 Senator Hagan’s aide emphasized the first sentence, and particularly ‘the jurisdiction thereof.'  I argue, if birthright citizenship were the intent of the authors, then why didn’t they just write, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside”?  Why didn’t they just leave it at that?  Because, birthright citizenship was not the intent, that’s why.

The 14^th is a post civil war amendment.  It was established to ensure that ex-slaves and their progeny were guaranteed rights of citizenship.  Furthermore, the majority of this amendment was designed to punish the South.  Those who participated in the rebellion were disenfranchised.  They were not allowed to vote, or hold public office.  They were also forced to pay Northern war debts.  I, of course, related the context to which the 14^th was written.  Needless to say, Senator Hagan’s aide was completely ignorant of the true meaning of this amendment.

I have argued before, and will again, that the 14^th Amendment is an outdated civil war relic, and must be repealed.  It has outlived its usefulness, and is currently undermining our federalist system.  If you need any proof of that, just take a look at our illegal alien invasion.

 

Source:  http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv