Sunday, March 28, 2010

14 Amendment - Is it being mis-interpreted?

I have said before that I believe that some of our Bill of Rights should be studied closely and changes considered and applied for this Century as nothing is the same as it was 200 plus years ago.

Today, George Will challenges the interpretation of the 14 Amendment and says,

"Appropriately, in 1884 the Supreme Court held that children born to Indian parents were not born "subject to" U.S. jurisdiction because, among other reasons, the person so born could not change his status by his "own will without the action or assent of the United States." And "no one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent."

Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school says this decision "seemed to establish" that U.S. citizenship is "a consensual relation, requiring the consent of the United States." So: "This would clearly settle the question of birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens. There cannot be a more total or forceful denial of consent to a person's citizenship than to make the source of that person's presence in the nation illegal."

Read his column on Immigrant babies and Citizenship

No comments: