Quote:As soon as I read your question I knew exactly where you are going with this.   :thumbsup:   I do disagree with your statement that "republicans think this is a good idea" though.  Some my think that, but not all.

 

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jagibelieve" data-cid="518824" data-time="1439927246">
<div>
As soon as I read your question I knew exactly where you are going with this.   :thumbsup:   I do disagree with your statement that "republicans think this is a good idea" though.  Some my think that, but not all.

 

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.

 

We can't decide which parts of The Constitution we should enforce and which parts we should not.

 

We can't decide which parts of The Constitution we should enforce and which parts we should not.

</div>
</blockquote>
 

I am not now and never have been a constitutional lawyer, but at the same time i know that the constitutional protection of free speech still doesn't allow you to scream bomb on a plane and the right to keep and bear arms doesn't mean that you wouldn't have to comply with background checks or registration requirements.  In that vein and given the plain text of the amendment i think that if you had a bill that simply directed that parents here illegally don't qualify as being under the jurisdiction there of and had a hearing or a review of their legal status as part of determining the status of the child you would comply with the fundamental directive of due process and you would be using the text of the 14th amendment not repealing it.

---