Did you even read the OP before posting this fiction? FYI, the authors of the amendment explained during the congressional debates that the amendment would not even grant citizenship to American Indians and their children born afterward. That's why American Indians did not get citizenship until Congress passed a law that granted it in 1924--back then everyone still knew what the 14th Amendment did and did not mean. Moreover, the first Supreme Court decisions on the amendment specified that the amendment did not even grant citizenship to newborns whose parents were foreign diplomats serving in the U.S
.
Because neither Native Americans nor foreign diplomats were considered "subject to the jurisdiction thereof".
What relevance does this have to immigrants, who are? (And I don't think you'd want them not to be.)
No, it is not. Not even U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark said that the 14th Amendment grants citizenship to children whose parents are in the U.S. illegally. That case involved the children of lawful permanent residents, not illegal immigrants.
There is no reading of the 14th amendment that permits this distinction. Immigrants, illegal or otherwise, are subject to the jurisidiction of the US. (They're also subject to draft laws, contra your assertions. Even undocumented immigrants are required to register for the Selective Service, as was I, with a green card.)
Your response is what is clueless. Did you even read the OP? You didn't address a single fact documented in the OP.
I did. For example, the first sentence. It's clear from the congressional record that congress knew that the 14th amendment would grant citizenship to virtually everyone born in the US (apart from the aforementioned narrow categories). They passed it. It is, therefore, the intended result. The only room for debate among reasonable people, then, is entirely around whether they ought to have passed it, or whether it ought to be amended.
Perhaps we should see this issue from the vantage point of the millions--literally millions--of families who are currently waiting in the legal immigration line, families who have played by the rules, who have filed the required paperwork and fees, and who are waiting to lawfully enter the country. It is manifestly unfair to them to allow people who have violated our immigration laws to remain here. How do you think those families feel when they see that illegal immigrants are receiving free education, welfare benefits, and even driver's licenses? How is that fair to those who are playing by the rules and honoring our immigration laws?
This is completely irrelevant to the American-born
children of illegal immigrants, who did not cut the line, nor did they break any rules. Birthright citizenship is not a "benefit" afforded to their parents. It's afforded to them.
I mean, if we want to talk about fairness and compassion, how about some fairness and compassion for the millions of people who are honoring our immigration laws and trying to enter the U.S. legally? They want the American dream for their kids too. They want a better life too. And they are playing by the rules and obeying the law. But, nah, some of you folks want to let illegal immigrants jump to the front of the line in the name of fairness and compassion. That's very unfair and uncompassionate to the millions of people who are following the law and trying to legally gain the American dream.
I'm one of these law-abiding immigrants. I got a green card when I was six. I had ◊◊◊◊-all to do with it, and I don't give two ◊◊◊◊◊ about the mythical American dream. I am not aggrieved in the slightest by the existence of US citizens born to undocumented parents. The alternative is creating a cohort of people in the US, who have never known another country, and have no path to citizenship. Potentially for generations. That's a really dumb idea, and it's made worse if you also deny them any education at all.
The idea that I did something to deserve this status, where the six-year-old who has illegal immigrants for parents did not, is ludicrous.
