logoalt Hacker News

blktigeryesterday at 3:14 PM4 repliesview on HN

I should be unanimous, it's what the constitution says. If you don't like it you need to go through the amendment process.


Replies

nonethewiseryesterday at 3:17 PM

>I should be unanimous, it's what the constitution says

Thats a tautology. “What the constitution says” is the thing in question.

show 3 replies
arpinumyesterday at 3:24 PM

> All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof ...

It's the second part that is in dispute and is not clear from the constitution's text what exactly it means and who it excludes. And yes, it has always excluded some people born within the borders, it is not a meaningless statement.

show 2 replies
voakbasdayesterday at 3:21 PM

In the past decade, the Constitution hasn’t slowed down the courts from creatively interpreting its various clauses. Their decisions have effectively amended many of those fundamental (and arguably inalienable) rights. Repeatedly.

wang_liyesterday at 3:28 PM

This trivial reading of the constitution doesn't align with the reality. Two simple exceptions and a third not so simple are children of diplomats, children of invading armies, and native americans, who required an act of congress to give citizenship at birth.