by Al Benson Jr.
In my most recent article I asked a few questions.
I will ask another question or two here and repeat one of the ones I asked in the last article because I think it needs to be asked again–and again and again until someone gives us a satisfactory answer.
The first part of the 14th Amendment says: “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.” There is more to it all, but this is the main part needed for our purposes here.
So I wonder, is this to be taken literally? Does this mean that the child of some Communist diplomat (or spy) born here while his or her father was stationed here during the Cold War, and since recalled to the glorious Soviet empire, is automatically a citizen of this country due to the accident of birth in this country? If that is the case, then there may be quite a handful of US citizens living in Russia, China, and other Leftist countries in our day, due to their having been born here while Dad was in this country trying to subvert our domestic institutions.
Does this mean that the child of illegal immigrants born here is automatically a citizen, even if they are not subject to US jurisdiction, which it seems they are not, otherwise they wouldn’t be illegal immigrants.
I think some of these issues in our day need to be dealt with. What about all these people from all over the world that come to New York to work at the socialist United Nations? They have diplomatic immunity, which means, to a large extent, they are not subject to US jurisdiction. Are their kids born here also US citizens, even though they will, at some point, return to the country of their parents’ origin? If the answer to all these questions is “Yes, all the people you noted here are automatically US citizens” then I submit that you have 14th Amendment that has run amuck and quite possibly needs to be amended to exclude these folks. Or was such a situation the intention of the framers of this amendment to begin with? After all, one of those that contributed to the 14th Amendment was Robert Dale Owen the socialist. It could be that maybe we need to re-examine the 14th Amendment! I can see the need for that.
But first, maybe we need to go back and take a stronger look at what the Kennedy Brothers said about that amendment in The South Was Right on page 172. Again, we need to note what the Kennedy Brothers said. In 1866 the North removed the Southern States from the Union. The North declared them to be non-states. However, in order to get back into the Union all the Southern States had to do was to ratify the 14th Amendment! Sounds so simple, right?
Question: if these states ratified the 14th Amendment while they were still officially out of the Union. are their ratifications even legal???
I realize I’ve asked this question before. I am asking it again. Were their ratifications even legal? How does your state legally ratify an amendment when your state is technically not a part of the Union?
I think, after I get this article posted I am going to send copies of it to my elected Senators and Representatives here in Louisiana to see what they say about it. I might recommend that some of you all in other states do the same thing and see what you get back for replies. Maybe at some point we could all compare notes to see what our Congress people have said to all of us. That might be an interesting exercise (in futility?)
I hope I may have the perseverance to continue to ask our elected officials this question until I get an answer that satisfies.