Rep. Steve King’s Illogical Stance on the 14th Ammendment

If we lived on the planet Vulcan, Rep. Steve King would be shot dead for being illogical. Recently the Iowa congressman said:

The framers did not consider the babies of illegals when they framed
the 14th amendment because we didn’t have immigration law at the time so
they could not have wanted to confer automatic citizenship on the
babies of people who were unlawfully in the United States.

This is the most illogical statement I have read in quite awhile. As a good friend of mine told me, AT MOST, you can say the intent of the framers is unknown. If ALL the people who wrote, and then voted for ratification of, the fourteenth amendment had no concept of illegal immigration, how can Steve King logically say that there was an implied bar against the children of undocumented/illegal people? Maybe some, or most of them, would still support blanket birthright citizenship given the alternative of having children being in some sort of limbo as to citizenship or the possibility that it could create a large segment of the population with no reason or ability to fully integrate. The simple truth is Steve King just wants to put his own twist on something that is clearly written.

The wording of the fourteenth amendment is absolutely clear,  “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.”

Added to all this is the fact that there really is no such thing as an ‘anchor baby,’ as in a child that allows its parent(s) in the country illegally to stay. The fact is, the parent still can’t legally live in the United States. King went on to say in the interview quoted above that he wished to change the law despite the clear constitutional hurdles he would face. If King doesn’t truly believe his own constitutional argument, he is violating his oath to support the Constitution, and if he does truly believe it, then we might be in even more trouble.

[via TPM]