Academia (And Congress) Start To Catch Up With Rethinking Birthright Citizenship in the Wake of 9/11
Print Friendly and PDF

This is almost a year old, but I saw it on Hugh Hewitt today. was on this before 9/11:Weigh Anchor! Enforce The Citizenship Clause, August 31, 2001, by Nathaniel Parker, who was right next to Ground Zero 11 days later. Peter Brimelow was on it even earlier, see here for his personal involvement.

JOHN C. EASTMAN Chapman University School of Law; The Claremont Institute Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence September 29, 2005
Abstract: Testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives, Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims (Sept. 29, 2005) contends that the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment has been misconstrued as mandating birthright citizenship. Rather, the clause was a codification of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, which quite clearly exempted from the automatic citizenship provisions children of parents who owed allegiance to a foreign power - i.e., those who were in the U.S. only temporarily (and particularly those who were in the U.S. illegally). This was the understanding of those who drafted and those who ratified the 14th Amendment, and was confirmed by the Supreme Court in the first two cases to address the clause. In 1898, the Court reversed course, though, holding that the Clause mandated birthright citizenship, resulting in a repudiation of the principle of bilateral consent as the foundation for citizenship.
SSRN-Born in the U.S.A.? Rethinking Birthright Citizenship in the Wake of 9/11 by John Eastman

A PDF of the whole testimony is here.

Print Friendly and PDF