No photo
Asker
Posted about 2 years ago.

Yes, but a "citizen" is NOT a "natural born citizen". If they were the same, there would be no need for redundancy in Article 2, Section 1, which states:

"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;"

If you are claiming that they are the SAME, they why are BOTH in the clause?

Why doe3sn't it just say "Citizen"?

No photo
Asker
Posted about 2 years ago.

I already know the intent of the Civil Rights Act and the 14th amendment was passed to render the Civil Rights Act Constitutional, since it wasn't amended to the Constitution.

The 14th amendment citizenship clause was just declaring what was already law (The Civil Rights Act). My claims are validated by Senator Jacob Howard (the author) during the 14th amendment debates...

"This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, AND SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States."
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=11

Now if you say being born here makes you a citizen, why are they saying "born within the limits" AND "subject to the jurisdiction"? Didn't you say WITHIN THE LIMITS is SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION?

If they are the same, why the "AND"?

In the SAME record, we have Senator Trumbull and Senator Howard, explaining their intent of the clause:

Trumbull:
"The provision is, that 'all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.' That means 'subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.' What do we mean by 'complete jurisdiction thereof?' NOT OWING ALLEGIANCE TO ANYBODY ELSE. That is what it means."
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=14

So this proves that "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means the same exact thing as "not subject to any foreign power"

Senator Howard concurs with Trumbull's construction:
"I concur entirely with the honorable Senator from Illinois [Trumbull], in holding that the word "jurisdiction," as here employed, ought to be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction on the part of the United States, whether exercised by Congress, by the executive, or by the judicial department; that is to say, the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now."
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=16