Birthright Citizenship Is An Urban Legend, Not A Constitutional Right

Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – Why isn’t the follow-up question ever asked: Where did we get this birthright citizenship?  This is what’s known in philosophical circles as an enthymeme, which is basically the major premise is that birthright citizenship is 100 percent ironclad, legal, truthful, constitutional, 14^th Amendment constitutional and everybody already knows this so we don’t even need to discuss this.  Check out today’s transcript for the rest….

FOLKS, a message from Mike – The Audio Clip of The Day files, Project 76 feature presentations, Church Doctrine audio & video clips and everything else on this site are supported by YOU. We have over 70, of my personally designed, written, produced and directed products for sale in the Founders Tradin’ Post, 24/7,  here. You can also support our efforts with a Founders Pass membership granting total access to years of My work for just .17 cents per day. Not convinced? Take the tour! Thanks for 18 years of mike church.com! – Mike

HERE’S YOUR FREE AUDIO PREVIEW OF THIS CLIP OF THE DAY – TO HEAR THE ENTIRE EPISODE JOIN FOUNDERS PASS NOW! FOR HUNDREDS MORE CLIPS, VISIT THE CLIP OF THE DAY ARCHIVE HERE

Begin Mike Church Show Transcript

Mike:  Why isn’t the follow-up question ever asked: Where did we get this birthright citizenship?  This is what’s known in philosophical circles as an enthymeme, which is basically the major premise is that birthright citizenship is 100 percent ironclad, legal, truthful, constitutional, 14^th Amendment constitutional and everybody already knows this so we don’t even need to discuss

[private |FP-Monthly|FP-Yearly|FP-Yearly-WLK|FP-Yearly-So76|Founding Brother|Founding Father|FP-Lifetime]

this.  If you proceed from that point of view, then the discussion can then turn on how we treat birthright citizens.  In fact, no one can establish birthright citizenship using the 14^th Amendment as ratified.  It’s a farce.  Listen to this headline.  NBC News has an entire front-page exposé dedicated to the subject of which I and the Three Stooges cutout across the way from me are currently discussing.  Here’s the headline, “Where the GOP 2016 Candidates Stand on Birthright Citizenship.”

[reading]

With his call over the weekend to “end birthright citizenship,” Donald Trump reignited a political debate over whether children born in the United States should be denied citizenship if their parents are undocumented immigrants. [Mike: They most certainly should.]

Here’s where those 2016 GOP contenders stand on the issue:

[end reading]

Mike:  It is presented as though it’s a foregone conclusion.  This is just part of the law.  This is how we do business here in ‘Merica.

[reading]

Those In Favor Of Ending Birthright Citizenship

Donald Trump: “This remains the biggest magnet for illegal immigration.”

Rand Paul: “This resolution makes clear that under the 14^th Amendment a person born in the United States to illegal aliens does not automatically gain citizenship,” he said in 2011 . . . [Mike: Paul is the only one. He’s correct.]

Rick Santorum: “Other enticements to illegal immigration, such as birthright citizenship, should be ended… Of developed countries other than the United States, only Canada has birthright citizenship.”

Lindsey Graham: “Birthright citizenship I think is a mistake. We should change our Constitution to say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child’s automatically . . .

[end reading]

Mike:  You don’t have to change the Constitution.  It already says that.  That’s the point.  The Constitution does not say if you get your private parts, if the private part of a female is on the United States side of the Rio Grande River, even though her head and tummy and the rest of her is on the other side, then the kid that pops out into the river is a U.S. citizen.  I give that example because it just illustrates how preposterous it is.  [mocking] “Come on, Mike, you can do better than that.”  Why?  How?  It perfectly illustrates the stupidity of it.  The Latin word for stupidity is stultis.  We still use the word sometimes when we say that something is stultifying.  This is stultifying.  I tell you, the libs have done a number on the Constitution.  We all know this.  But the Conservatives have done little to correct it.

[reading]

Chris Christie: “I think all this stuff needs to be reexamined in light of the current circumstances. [Birthright citizenship] may have made sense at some point in our history, but right now, we need to re-look at all that.”

[end reading]

Mike:  Birthright citizenship should make sense in the history of no country, especially one that is a sovereign entity, and one that has a set of laws under which men live and under which they are governed.

[reading]

Scott Walker:

MSNBC’s Kasie Hunt: We should end birthright citizenship?

Walker: Yeah, to me it’s about enforcing the laws in this country.

(But Walker later appeared to walk it back: When asked if he misspoke on birthright citizenship, Walker said, per NBC’s Shaquille Brewster: “No, we had a three hour rolling gaggle there. It’s— you answer part of the question, somebody turns and asks you something. My point is, yeah I empathize with people who have concerns about that but until we fundamentally secure the border.”) [Mike: I don’t know what that means.]

Those Opposed To Ending Birthright Citizenship

Marco Rubio: “I’m not in favor repealing the 14^th Amendment . . .”

[end reading]

Mike:  Senator Rubio, you should be.  The 14th amendment, as previously stated, the miracle amendment, gives rise to most of these constitutional fantasies, and that’s exactly what they are.  Mr. Roarke on Fantasy Island couldn’t have granted greater fantasies than are granted under the 14th Amendment.

[reading]

Jeb Bush: “Look this is a constitutionally protected right . . .”

[end reading]

Mike:  It’s not a right to place your private parts on the U.S. side of the Rio Grande River, pop a kid out, and then claim that it’s an American citizen.  Where does this come from?  My heavens!

[reading]

George Pataki: “I don’t support amending the Constitution to kick out kids who were born here.” [Mike: You don’t have to amend the Constitution.]

Carly Fiorina: “It would take passing a constitutional amendment to get that changed. . .” [Mike: These people are all constitutional ignoramuses.]

Those Who Have Switched Their Position

John Kasich: Back in 2010, said he supported amending the Constitution to end birthright citizenship. [Mike: You don’t have to end something that doesn’t exist in the first place, Governor.]

“I frankly didn’t know as much about it [then]. You stick your name on a bill when you’re in Congress and they come at you left and right. But look, I don’t think we need to go there at this point… I am at the point now where I am extremely concerned about efforts that divide us in this country. And I am more interested in the kinds of things that can unite us. And we have bigger fish to fry frankly in my opinion, than that issue and that’s getting the wall done; making sure that if people violated the law who are here that they are punished for it. But if you’ve been law-abiding, we’re gonna welcome you to a path of . . .” [/private]

[end reading]

Mike:  This is just such garbage.  What does the Constitution actually say about birthright citizenship?  What does the miracle amendment actually say about birthright citizenship?  It’s a fair question to ask, I think.  Amendment 14, Section 1, “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.”  I don’t even need to read the rest of it.  You already heard all that you need to know, that birthright citizenship is a crock.  It’s such a large crock, if it were in the room or the vehicle in which you are currently riding, it would be steaming and smelling quite profusely, to the point where you would have to stop and either throw the thing into a sewer where it belongs or leave the vehicle.  “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

I only needed to read the first sentence to you.  Those of you that are sharpies out there, you picked up on this so you already knew this.  “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.”  That argument that we have here from time to time about whether Senator Cruz or Senator Rubio are eligible under the natural-born citizen clause has a little bit to do with how you decipher this and how you unpack this and get to the truth of the matter.

You see, currently, just as an example — folks, this was true for over 200 years.  Let’s just say Ambassador McGillicuddy from Ireland — so the McGillicuddys are here as ambassadors from Ireland.  They are Irish citizens.  They are on an ambassadorial mission from the sovereign entity that is the country of Ireland.  If Ireland was to go to war and they needed to draft their citizens, Mr. and Mrs. McGillicuddy would be eligible.  Why?  Because they are under the jurisdiction of Ireland.  Ireland can tax them.  Ireland draft them.  Ireland can do all sorts of things because they are under the jurisdiction thereof.  They owe their allegiance, in other words, to Ireland.  Is everybody clear so far?

End Mike Church Show Transcript