# Congressman King and the 14th Amendment **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 23, 2010, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691 "2010-11-23T19:46:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/21 "2010-11-24T04:47:21Z")
> [@joebuck20](#): > > Well, I suppose that’s better than a clown who lives in the sewer and eats children. Is it really? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/22 "2010-11-24T14:08:09Z")
Not when that clown is Governor of Florida. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/23 "2010-11-24T14:46:52Z")
> [@joebuck20](#): > > Well, I suppose that’s better than a clown who lives in the sewer and eats children. Cite? ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/24 "2010-11-24T15:38:01Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > What law does a newborn break? Poe’s. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/25 "2010-11-24T16:28:55Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > What law does a newborn break? The mother breaks the law in order to confer citizenship on her newborn. And that then gives her a contact to become a legal immigrant herself. There is something fundamentally wrong with being able to commit an illegal act and have that benefit you. Also, the argument that ALL people born here, even if illegal, if it done by conquest goes to absurdity when you consider other situations. What if, say, China launched a surprise invasion and conquered California? Is it your position that they can airdrop millions of women into California to give birth and then, by the Constitution, we can’t ever get rid of the next generation of Chinese who are here to complete the conquest? Yes, I understand that it is a far-fetched example, but I can’t get past the illegality of what these mothers are doing. In any other contract situation, which is sort of what a Constitution is, you can’t get benefits by acting in bad faith and committing criminal acts. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/26 "2010-11-24T16:32:23Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > The mother breaks the law in order to confer citizenship on her newborn. And that then gives her a contact to become a legal immigrant herself. First, it is wrong to presume every child born here to a legal is born here “in order to confer citizenship on [the] newborn.” People who live in a place for a while have kids. It’s part of life. And if those kids are born here, well, why wouldn’t they be citizens? And moreover, hasn’t it been pretty repeatedly shown that having a child here does not get you legal status? I was udner the impression people were regularly deported despite having children who were citizens. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/27 "2010-11-24T16:34:53Z")
The Wong Kim Ark ruling specifically excludes people not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, which by any rational definition would include hostile invaders. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/28 "2010-11-24T18:15:16Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > The mother breaks the law in order to confer citizenship on her newborn. And that then gives her a contact to become a legal immigrant herself. > > There is something fundamentally wrong with being able to commit an illegal act and have that benefit you. > > Also, the argument that ALL people born here, even if illegal, if it done by conquest goes to absurdity when you consider other situations. What if, say, China launched a surprise invasion and conquered California? Is it your position that they can airdrop millions of women into California to give birth and then, by the Constitution, we can’t ever get rid of the next generation of Chinese who are here to complete the conquest? > > Yes, I understand that it is a far-fetched example, but I can’t get past the illegality of what these mothers are doing. In any other contract situation, which is sort of what a Constitution is, you can’t get benefits by acting in bad faith and committing criminal acts. Does it really give her a break? It may have in the past but i have heard lots of stories of mother and son being sent back. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/29 "2010-11-24T18:18:06Z")
Parents of US citizen children are somewhat less _likely_ to be deported by immigration judges. There’s no rule that prevents them (and their children) from being deported, however. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/30 "2010-11-24T18:25:31Z")
Any children born here can’t be deported, but the idea that having a child here gives undocumented immigrants any kind of legal resident status is talk radio mythology. Incidentally, there are unntold millions of illegal residents already here who aren’t being deported even without any natural born children, so trying to repeal citizenship for those children would do absolutely nothing to decrease the population of illegal immigrants. It’s just petty, vicious, pointless vindictiveness against babies who are the wrong color. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/31 "2010-11-24T18:28:05Z")
Incidentally, do you know who else was an anchor baby? Jesus. His parents travelled down from Galilee, which was a tetrarchy under the control of Herod Antipas, down into the Roman controlled province of Judea to have their baby. I bet they wre just trying to reap all those Roman welfare benefits. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/32 "2010-11-24T18:31:50Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Any children born here can’t be deported, but the idea that having a child here gives undocumented immigrants any kind of legal resident status is talk radio mythology. Children born here can’t be deported, but if both parents get deported it’s essentially the same thing. What are they going to do, leave the baby? ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/33 "2010-11-24T18:39:17Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Children born here can’t be deported, but if both parents get deported it’s essentially the same thing. What are they going to do, leave the baby? It isn’t essentially the same thing. Being deported impacts your future possibilities of legally returning to the U.S. Leaving with your parents, who have been deported, does not. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/34 "2010-11-24T18:55:19Z")
It’s the same thing as far as the parents are concerned, I mean. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2010, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/35 "2010-11-24T18:58:21Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Children born here can’t be deported, but if both parents get deported it’s essentially the same thing. What are they going to do, leave the baby? Yes. The baby is entitled to become a ward of the state, if nothing else. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2010, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/36 "2010-11-25T01:56:17Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Did too - the Indian nations weren’t part of the US at the time. They were part of the US; they just weren’t “subject to the jurisdiction” of the US, which is why I think the 14th amendment is worded the way it is. ---
**Author:** ![Pierrot\_Le\_Fou](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f475e1/32.png) [@Pierrot\_Le\_Fou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pierrot_Le_Fou)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2010, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/37 "2010-11-25T03:28:33Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > What law does a newborn break? Rape. Putting your whole body in a woman’s vagina is really crossing the line. ---
**Author:** ![Pierrot\_Le\_Fou](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f475e1/32.png) [@Pierrot\_Le\_Fou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pierrot_Le_Fou)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2010, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/38 "2010-11-25T03:33:14Z")
More seriously: > [@](#): > > But when Congress was debating the 14th Amendment in 1866, it considered the likelihood that the words would apply to children of immigrants too. And some lawmakers approved of that idea. > > During that debate, Senator Edgar Cowan of Pennsylvania objected to the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment. ‘‘Is the child of the Chinese immigrant in California a citizen?’’ he asked on the Senate floor. > > Senator John Conness of California said the answer should be ‘‘yes.’’ > > ‘‘The children of all parentage whatever, born in California, should be regarded and treated as citizens of the United States, entitled to equal civil rights with other citizens,’’ Mr. Conness said. > **[Citizenship Proposal Faces Obstacle in the Constitution (Published 1996)](https://www.nytimes.com/1996/08/07/us/citizenship-proposal-faces-obstacle-in-the-constitution.html)** > > Republican Platform Committee proposes to deny US citizenship to children born in US to illegal immigrants, challenging pillar of Constitutional law erected nearly 130 years ago (M) ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2010, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/39 "2010-11-27T19:21:30Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > The Wong Kim Ark ruling specifically excludes people not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, which by any rational definition would include hostile invaders. Remember that in _Wong Van Ark_, his parents were here legally. My understanding is that the decision could be read to apply to anchor babies and so it has been assumed to be so. I suspect King’s strategy may be to exclude anchor babies as not being eligible under the 14th Amendment and force SCOTUS to definitively rule that the 14th Amendment does apply to children born to illegal immigrants. I don’t think that he anticipates it working, but in this anti-illegal immigration culture it is sure to make SCOTUS (and through them Obama) unpopular. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2010, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691/40 "2010-11-27T19:30:18Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I believe it could be most concisely stated as, “fuck them Mexicans”. No! That’s what got us into the _anchor baby_ situation to begin with! On the serious side: Congressman King is a piece of shit. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/congressman-king-and-the-14th-amendment/561691.md?page=3)