The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of native-born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently-freed slaves. In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by writing:

"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."

The original intent of the 14th Amendment was clearly not to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law at taxpayer expense. Current estimates indicate there may be over 300,000 anchor babies born each year in the U.S., thus causing illegal alien mothers to add more to the U.S. population each year than immigration from all sources in an average year before 1965.

The correct interpretation of the 14th Amendment is that an illegal alien mother is subject to the jurisdiction of her native country, as is her baby.

Over a century ago, the Supreme Court correctly confirmed this restricted interpretation of citizenship in the so-called 'Slaughter-House cases' [83 US 36 (1873)] and in [112 US 94 (1884)]. In Elk v.Wilkins, the phrase 'subject to its jurisdiction' excluded from its operation 'children of ministers, consuls, and citizens of foreign states born within the United States.' In Elk, the American Indian claimant was considered not an American citizen because the law required him to be 'not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them direct and immediate allegiance.'

This cannot be helped because we have travellers from other countries who have children here and citizenship is automatically given and should be they are born here. You were born here, I was born here, we got citizenship from just being born here noone had to do anything to make us citizens and that is how it should be.

This must have happened once and such a ruckus was made about it that it became an urban legend...lol Doesn't even sound real.

i feel that the born in the united states

clause

is abused greatly

i believe that this cluse was established for those legally in the country

not for whom ever sneaks across any borders

but i am taking liberty in saying this

so maybe it is incorrect

from page 1

That is not included in the list fanta.

adj4u.....

You are correct. Read all of fanta's posts and mine. Citizenship is not meant for children of illegals who sneak across the border into our country. Giving the children of illegals/criminals is an abuse of the 14th Amendment.

if a child is born of someone illegally in the country

then the 14th ammendment should not apply

they should have to be here and in legal standing

but that is only my opinion

based on the following

there is a law that says

one may not profit from committing a crime

kinda like being a serial killer then writing a book about it

said serial killer is blocked form receiving profits

from said book