Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, in his dissent to 1949 Terminiello v. Chicago decision wrote: “The Constitution is not a suicide pact.” Maybe yes, and maybe no. It will depend on how the Supreme Court interprets the 14th Amendment to decide the Trump v. Barbara case. There are clearly a few justices that would like the Constitution to be the alter on which America dies. By this summer, we’ll know if they’re the majority. I can hardly wait for their convoluted reasoning.
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution states:
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.
Up until President Trump said, “You guys have got it all wrong,” we had been treating everyone born here as U.S. citizens, regardless of their immigration status (i.e. legal, illegal, or just vacationing).
Until recently, that interpretation wasn’t such a big deal, because it involved only a small number of people. But President “SoftServe” opened our borders, issued a mass invitation, and flooded our country with tens of millions of illegal aliens. Now approximately 10 percent of all births in the U.S. are to mothers who are here illegally. That adds 320,000 new citizens every year, simply because their mothers happened to be north of the Rio Grande when they went into labor. Now the correct interpretation of the citizenship amendment is a BIG FREAKING DEAL. In fact it’s big enough, that the survival of our republic may depend on it.
The issue is that little “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” thingy in the Amendment, and how it is interpreted.
When the 14th Amendment was written, its authors intended “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” to mean: having legal allegiance to the United States. It was never intended to grant the rights of citizenship to the offspring of people who shouldn’t be here, and in many cases are here to commit murder, mayhem, and terrorism.
But Ketanji Brown Jackson disagrees with that interpretation. She insists that “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means “subject to the law.” Her interpretation is that if an illegal alien could be arrested for committing murder, mayhem, or terrorism while here, then any children born by them within our borders are automatically citizens.
I’m reasonably certain that Justices Kagan and Sotomayor agree with Jackson. When the decision comes down later this summer, we’ll learn how many of the “go along to get along” squishes would rather turn the Constitution into a suicide pact, than reap the whirlwind (as Grill-Master Schumer would say).
Birth tourism is already a huge problem, so consider this scenario:
- A female member of the Chinese Communist Party comes to America for a little R&R on South Beach, while in her ninth month of pregnancy.
- After giving birth in a Miami hospital, the baby gets a U.S. birth certificate, and by Jackson’s interpretation is a brand-spanking-new American citizen.
- After recovery, mother and baby return to China, where mom resumes her duties as a communist apparatchik, and her baby begins a couple of decades of party indoctrination.
- The baby never returns to the United States, but at the age of 18 begins requesting mail in ballots – written in his native Cantonese of course.
- Our federal government dutifully mails him a ballot, and ensures his vote is counted when it returns.
With three of our last seven presidential elections decided by fewer than 50,000 votes, it is conceivable that foreign enemies could affect the outcome of our elections. Maybe that’s how we ended up with a President who didn’t come out of his basement for the whole campaign.
So, which Justice Jackson will the Roberts court side with: the one from 1949, who thought the Constitution was a framework to preserve America; or the one from 2026, who thinks the Constitution is a handy tool with which to destroy America?
That election of President “Auto-Pen” in 2020 is looking a bit more pivotal now, isn’t it?
Author Bio: John Green is a political refugee from Minnesota, now residing in Idaho. He has written for American Thinker, The American Spectator, Convention of States Action, and American Free News Network. He can be reached at greenjeg@gmail.com.
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Substack: American Free News Network Substack
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/u