Supporters of birthright citizenship are historically and legally wrong

Supporters of birthright citizenship are historically and legally wrong.

If far-left activist @jjouvenal bothered to read DOJ’s brief instead of cry “racism” he’d see that DOJ cited many opponents of birthright citizenship for children of temporarily present aliens, including:… pic.twitter.com/1QUrPpV71o
— DOJ Rapid Response (@DOJRR47) March 30, 2026

Supporters of birthright citizenship are historically and legally wrong.

If far-left activist
@jjouvenal
bothered to read DOJ’s brief instead of cry “racism” he’d see that DOJ cited many opponents of birthright citizenship for children of temporarily present aliens, including:

- Senator Lyman Trumbull and Representative John Bingham (leading proponents of the Fourteenth Amendment)

- Representative Philemon Bliss (a critic of Dred Scott v. Sandford)

- Justice Samuel F. Miller (an appointee of President Lincoln)

- George Bancroft (who delivered President Lincoln’s funeral oration)

- Henry Campbell Black (a respected legal commentator)

The child is subject to the jurisdiction of the parents. If parents are not US Citizens, the child is the birthright citizen of the country of the parent's allegiance.

The duplicitiousness of the 13th and 14th needs to be addressed and both removed. The (ratified)13th removed the outlawing of BAR agents in government (British Accreditation Registry), which FARA (Foreign Agent Registry Act) still states that BAR must register with FARA. But, they are not told that.....and that is why they replaced the (ratified) 1st 13th with the 2nd 13th, thus allowing the 14th to be ratified. We have been lied to more than we can imagine. Both undermine the Common Law or Natural Law. Online says one thing. Common/ Natural law says something different. The word 'subject,' has multiple meanings, one of which is 'under authority,' to a 'higher' authority. That is NOT what Natural Law IS, nor is it what the Common Law states. Four states are still Commonwealths, Kentucky, Virginia, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. People have both blood and soil rights in those states, (jus sanguinus/blood and jus soleil/ soil)——not 'permissions granted by govco.'

Commonwealths are centered upon the common good, including family and institutions.
Commonwealths are centered upon representative government.
Commonwealths acknowledge God.

As Adams also famously stated, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.” Any true commonwealth cannot ignore God and his good character reflected in creation."

Replies

Jea9 March 31, 2026 at 9:50am

The child is subject to the jurisdiction of the parents. If parents are not US Citizens, the child is the birthright citizen of the country of the parent's allegiance.

The duplicitiousness of the 13th and 14th needs to be addressed and both removed. The (ratified)13th removed the outlawing of BAR agents in government (British Accreditation Registry), which FARA (Foreign Agent Registry Act) still states that BAR must register with FARA. But, they are not told that.....and that is why they replaced the (ratified) 1st 13th with the 2nd 13th, thus allowing the 14th to be ratified. We have been lied to more than we can imagine. Both undermine the Common Law or Natural Law. Online says one thing. Common/ Natural law says something different. The word 'subject,' has multiple meanings, one of which is 'under authority,' to a 'higher' authority. That is NOT what Natural Law IS, nor is it what the Common Law states. Four states are still Commonwealths, Kentucky, Virginia, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. People have both blood and soil rights in those states, (jus sanguinus/blood and jus soleil/ soil)——not 'permissions granted by govco.'

Commonwealths are centered upon the common good, including family and institutions.
Commonwealths are centered upon representative government.
Commonwealths acknowledge God.

As Adams also famously stated, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.” Any true commonwealth cannot ignore God and his good character reflected in creation."
- Jea9 > Jea9 March 31, 2026 at 9:56am
  
  Note that if the globalists can remove the child's citizenship of the parent's country *via blood), then they can use THAT to bring in hordes of pregnant women to birth on any land they choose, and then, those babies are citizen's of the world's domain, not the parent's domain, not the family's domain. ALL of their plans, the DS globalists, require multiple steps to be taken in order to achieve their one world rulership and our demise by their orders/schemes.
- Jea9 > Jea9 March 31, 2026 at 10:02am
  
  And the UN Child Rights Treaty is the implementation of that scheme. It has not been publicized, but has existed in waiting for decades.

This reply was deleted.