Quote:1.) from a legal standpoint i don't think it's that far of a stretch to interpret the text of the 14th amendment (born in or naturalized to the United States, and SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION there of)to positively infer that for the birth to qualify then the presence of the child and the parents would have to be in accordance with the laws of said jurisdiction.  

 

2.) from a political standpoint, this is overkill and unnecessarily getting in the weeds.  if you build the wall or close the border by other means then this problem goes away without having a protracted [BAD WORD REMOVED] contest with the Supreme Court.  

 

3.) I wish people read the plain text of the 1st amendment before banning religious expressions in the public square.  

 

4.) I and others supporting stronger immigration enforcement have also said that a reasonable compromise would be to leave the current interpretation in tact but not extend special privilege to the parents after the birth of the child in circumvention of immigration law.

1. I think it is quite a stretch, a stretch so far that no court would uphold it. Trying to use "jurisdiction" as a loophole would end in failure based upon the simple fact that, as jagibelieve pointed out, every single person in the US (aside from the few covered by diplomatic immunity) is under the jurisdiction of its laws, including a newborn child.

 

2. Building a wall is a physical impossibility unless you want to start effectively ceding large chunks of land to Mexico by building it 20-50 miles off the border in areas where terrain and/or the natural flow of the Rio Grande make it impossible to build it on the dotted line. Closing the border is a practical impossibility and a shot in our own foot economically.

 

3. Huh? Where'd that come from?

 

4. I'd be all in favor of this. I don't think it's unreasonable to tell parents that they can leave their citizen child in the care of legally-present relatives or the state and return home, or take their child home with them knowing that the birth has been documented and a birth certificate issued, the child is a citizen, and that child is free to return anytime so long as they cross the border with a legal US resident or by themself if they're of age to do so. The birth of a child in the US should not grant parents here illegally the right to stay in the US. That just opens up too many problems, both legal and ethical (should a woman eight months pregnant really be sneaking through the desert in July?), to be helpful at all in solving the problem of illegal immigration.

---