Greg Jarrett: Trump Has a Very Credible Argument on Birthright Citizenship

RUSH EXCERPT:

JARRETT: “Well, the media, Liz, will tell you that Trump’s going to lose. I’m not so sure. He does have a very credible argument in denying automatic citizenship to children of parents who are here illegally. You know, those who wrote 14th Amendment never intended for it to apply the people who broke the law the come here and have no permission to even be here, and that’s why they inserted the key phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” into the 14th Amendment. What does it mean? It’s a condition of allegiance to the United States. The mere act of setting foot on U.S. soil, that doesn’t necessarily constitute allegiance, especially the millions of illegal migrants who have remained in the shadows. They’re not paying taxes, they don’t file returns, they didn’t obtain Social Security numbers. How can they be, quote, subject to the jurisdiction if their allegiance is unknown because their whereabouts are unknown? And if you go back and examine the debate 1868, and I did look at it, there’s no evidence that Congress meant to extend citizenship to children of people here illegally. No, their primary objective back then was to grant citizenship rights to formally enslave people. So I think on Wednesday you’re going to hear some justices embrace Trump’s argument. The question is, will there be enough? Elizabeth: yeah, will there be enough. We hear you. The argument is they should be removed on the grounds they’re not subject to full jurisdiction after the parents’ owe primary allegiance to the foreign country they were from. What about past Supreme Court decisions dealing with birthright citizenshipsome have we seen cases like this in the past? We hear you cite other cases.”