Some thoughts concerning birthright citizenship in the United States

The 14th Amendment of the Constitution is the final word on the matter of birthright citizenship and the intent of its meaning is found in the Congressional debate and post-Civil War history at the time of passage.

The 14th Amendment was created exclusively for application to slaves who were then currently within the United States and their children. Holding otherwise is aiding and abetting America’s enemies in this ongoing irregular war. It is time to put America first.

I suspect the founding fathers never really considered the concept of being here illegally.

You either got admitted when you arrived at a port or you were sent back where you came from.

In Inglis v. Trustees (1830) and Elk v. Wilkins (1884), the Supreme Court considered the status of children who are born in the United States, of fathers who owe allegiance to a sovereignty other than the United States. In both cases, the Court ruled that such children are not even citizens, let alone natural born citizens.

It will have to go to the Supreme Court and can't possibly go soon enough. I somehow feel confident the ruling will be favorable when the case is considered. The USSC, in 1898 in the case of Wong Kim Ark wrongly applied the law of the 14th Amendment and it has been further mis-applied and extended to the children of illegals since then.

Wong Kim Ark, who was born in San Francisco in 1873, had been denied re-entry to the United States after a trip abroad, under the Chinese Exclusion Act, a law banning virtually all Chinese immigration and prohibiting Chinese immigrants from becoming naturalized U.S. citizens. He challenged the government's refusal to recognize his citizenship, and the Supreme Court ruled in his favor, holding that the citizenship language in the Fourteenth Amendment encompassed the circumstances of his birth and could not be limited in its effect by an act of Congress.[8]

Liberals and other assorted mentally ill have been around a long time.

https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/supreme-court-case-library/united-states-v-wong-kim-ark-1898

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

“Birth tourism” is a big business around the world.
Anchor babies and those rules that protect them are a complete bastardization of the 14th amendment and needs to be addressed. People are coming from all over the world to have their babies here, including many nations who are hostile to our country- like China.
We need to end this NOW.
There will be no “separation of families” as the corrupt media likes to portray it.

WIKI

Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884), was a United States Supreme Court landmark 1884 decision with respect to the citizenship status of Indians.

John Elk, a Winnebago Indian, was born on an Indian reservation within the territorial bounds of United States.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_v._Wilkins

In the Congressional debate over the proposed Amendment XIV the Amendment was meant to be broad, but to exclude Indians born on tribal land and children of persons with diplomatic immunity.