this is pretty plain and not PC talk so I will try to be sensitive here.....from the author , Jacob Howard....."this amendment will of course NOT include persons who are foreigners, aliens, or ambassadors" and further " the person will be subject to the complete jurisdiction of the US" and "NOT owing any allegiance to any other government" that ought to shut up any thinking lib lawyers on this point of trying to co-opt the 14th for thugs in Mexico
If the 14th meant what the libs want us to believe it meant, then why did we need the Indian Naturalization Act of 1940, written nearly 80 years later?
lawyers are lawyers and park their common sense at the door....unlike Tim who uses his daily
were born on US soil then they are US citizens Just like the thug trump supporter that commited the mailbombs.
If not then they don't get the advantages of the 14th amendment.
sure its so simple we have lawyers lined up taking cases by the dozen to push fake 14th amendment cases....why is that frey?
All of these lawyers lined up to take on cases of the 14th amendment, it is because the clown in the WH and his koolaid drinking backers think you can use a executive order to change the 14th amendment.
Section 3 clearly states 2/3rds vote needed to change any part of it. The words "executive order" are not used...not even once.
Section 5 is absolute.
No one needs to change the 14th amendment because it does not grant automatic citizenship by birth unless either parent is a US citizen or the parents are here legally. It was written, by and large, to establish citizenship for former slaves.
I'll ask again... If you feel the 14th grants autocitizenship at birth under any circumstance, why did we need the Indian Naturalization act of 1940?
Maybe then you will understand what loophole they were closing with the enactment of this law because you clearly don6 st this point