The innate citizenship is a sacred guarantee
In the United States, the attempt to terminate the inherent citizenship is to try to reverse history and let our country go backwards. Dred Scott The decision in 1857 and the division of the national crisis quickly caught the country into a civil war. It is not enough to say that this action is “unconstitutional”; this strategy is to defile the sacred text with blasphemy lies.
The innate citizenship is the protection shield of anyone born in this country, just like the self -definition of the country we have; this is our legal DNA. The first section of the fourteenth amendment should be printed on a small layer of pressure card and placed in each American pocket. The language is very clear:
All those born or naturalized in the United States are citizens in the United States and their prefectures.
This language is the basis of the constitution as any other terms. For the survival and development of our diversified republic, it may be more important than the first amendment. The right to petition. government. It is inherent in the constitutional function as the federal system itself.
The Trump administration now scoffs at this period of history, claiming that it will sign an administrative order on the first day of Donald Trump's return to the oval office to end this guarantee. The meaning and value of identity “, this is Owa's dual -style language. “. The government proposed false originalist arguments, claiming that the guarantee of the fourteen amendments is only applicable to the free people and their descendants. On the contrary, the author of the amendment clearly regards the immigration population and its descendants as its plan. Part of the author of Article 1 and Congress, John Bingham, defended the amendment by using the authority of the constitutional maker. “Workers and builders”, they come from “every civilized country” and become “the citizen of the Republic. “This is why John C. Coughenour, a Federal District Court judge John C. Coughenour, said without hesitation last week:” This is a blatant order. “
The origin of part 1 can be traced back to our past. It is rooted in the US independence war and the subsequent petitions of African -American, asking them to serve the freedom and natural rights of the patriotic cause. It originated from many ideas and strategies of the British and American abolition movements. It echoed the equality between Thomas Jefferson in the “Declaration of Independence”. Abraham Lincoln used the same word in the Gealzburg speech, and he supported immigrants before the civil war. The most direct and powerful sign is that nearly 4 million slaves were liberated in the war. Without the greatest change in American history, there will be no 14th amendments -there is no inherent citizenship, no equal protection terms, and the same sacred compilation.
The deepest and inherent citizenship is rooted in the blood of more than 700,000 Americans who killed more than 700,000 Americans in the civil war. This disaster has made most historians say that the “secondary foundation” in the United States now. The rebirth emphasized in the 14th amendment is the core meaning of this sentence. The Trump administration wants to eliminate the inherent citizenship, which is part of the greater pursuit. The purpose is to eliminate most of the equalist traditions, transform American history into a permanent retrogression, and return to a safe constitutional white man Supreme era.
No matter how to emphasize the severity of Trump's proposal, it is impossible to exaggerate the historical ignorance behind it. The initial Republicans put forward the inherent citizenship in the amendment. What they did was nothing more than the biggest achievement of the civil war and fulfilling the promise of freedom to millions of people at that time. Or how about nationality. Come. The first section explained the significance of that war to the world. Any part of it now wipes out of Trump's favorite New President William McKinli in heritage. He has participated in the Battle of Antim. The federal victory has prompted the release of the Declaration of Black Slave.
Bineham from Ohio is a firm Christian disappointed Republican. For Bineham, this debate can be traced back to the crisis of slavery expansion in the 19850s. In 1858, he said: “Everyone knows that under our free system, everyone born by free parents within the jurisdiction of the United States is all American citizens.” Of course, Bineham overestimated this kind of Consensus, because the chief judge Roger B. Taney is in Dred Scott's case of Sanford Last year, the Supreme Court ruled by a 7-2 major ruling that according to US law, blacks “do not have any rights.” One of the magnificent goals of the 14th amendment is to derogate Dred Scott History decision.
In the winter of 1866, when Congress debated the content of a revision case, it faced many overwhelming obstacles, especially the deep -rooted historical racism and the federal theory that fundamentally protected the rights of the states. Congress has just fought a comprehensive war, aiming to restore the federal states in the southern Federation of the southern Federation and end slavery by overwhelming use of federal power.
However, despite the fierce disputes, Republicans are still confident. “I can't believe it,” the radical manager of his party, Sadis Stevens, wrote, “Some people do not admit that each of these proposals is fair.” They clearly knew they knew they knew themselves What goals want to achieve. Binham defended the amendment, saying it was the protection of “everyone's inherent rights”. Stevens believes that they must “laid the foundation of the government in the principle of eternal justice.” Senator Lyman Trumbul saw that they had promoted that “the principles of great creators have implanted them in each human chest.” They believe that they are developing justice and morality, not only to obtain free slaves, but also for the future of this country's immigrants. They deeply understand the fact that they have experienced the recent wave of Ireland and German immigrants.
As for the state's rights, Bineum has an unchanged answer. He announced that for the “descendants”, he sought “armed parliament … to give the” Rights Act “in the Constitution in various states.” In the United StatesBy federal power.
In the on -site debate, Binyham elaborated the purpose of the amendment. He claimed: “The days when Liberty's liberation has arrived, accompanied by pain, sadness, martyrdom, broken altar and broken heart.” But now he sees potential brilliant days, not only for the former slaves, but for immigrants for immigrants. That's the same. The Constitution can now “stipulate that no matter what skin tone he is, no matter what kind of sky he was born, no matter what kind of catastrophe conflicts, or under what kind of violence, his freedom may be Define, no matter how poor his life is, no matter how no friends … do not be deprived of life, freedom or property without legitimate legal procedures. “
Trump and his allies fought on this key terms in the Constitution. Americans must persuade in various ways in court. The vision of Trump's allies is a serious abuse of real history and its new constitution in the 1860s. If they succeed, then Grant will surrender to Lee in Apo Matosk.