Judge Rules NJ-Born ISIS Bride Not US Citizen

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
79,951
50,495
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
Read the fine print. She was born in NJ to a diplomat, excluding her from birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment, which reads:

"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." U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1 (emphasis supplied). Because, as the child of a diplomat, she was not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, but rather a foreign country, she was not then and has never been a U.S. citizen. This is not a decision against birthright citizenship (which is constitutionally mandated - see the quoted portion), but interpreting the clause as written. Pompeo had nothing to do with it, and Walton was appointed to the federal bench by GW Bush.
 
Jan 2019
11,225
3,909
southeast
Read the fine print. She was born in NJ to a diplomat, excluding her from birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment, which reads:

"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." U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1 (emphasis supplied). Because, as the child of a diplomat, she was not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, but rather a foreign country, she was not then and has never been a U.S. citizen. This is not a decision against birthright citizenship (which is constitutionally mandated - see the quoted portion), but interpreting the clause as written. Pompeo had nothing to do with it, and Walton was appointed to the federal bench by GW Bush.
What's your point? Following the law is a good thing as some stomp all over our Constitution and laws and what difference does it make who appointed the judge.
 
Jan 2019
11,225
3,909
southeast
What's your point? Following the law is a good thing as some stomp all over our Constitution and laws and what difference does it make who appointed the judge.
BTW, you neglected to acknowledge what her argument was...The family had provided documents from the U.N. showing Ahmed Muthana was terminated from his diplomatic job before his daughter's birth in October 1994, and the U.S. has twice issued Muthana an American passport based on those records.
 
Jul 2013
60,165
67,959
Nashville, TN
BTW, you neglected to acknowledge what her argument was...The family had provided documents from the U.N. showing Ahmed Muthana was terminated from his diplomatic job before his daughter's birth in October 1994, and the U.S. has twice issued Muthana an American passport based on those records.
Why is it a "win" that she was denied citizenship? Do you want her deported? How about her husband? Deport him for marrying an "illegal"?
 
Jan 2019
11,225
3,909
southeast
Why is it a "win" that she was denied citizenship? Do you want her deported? How about her husband? Deport him for marrying an "illegal"?
Hello,she is not in the US so how would she be deported. You are making absolutely no sense.
 

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
79,951
50,495
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
BTW, you neglected to acknowledge what her argument was...The family had provided documents from the U.N. showing Ahmed Muthana was terminated from his diplomatic job before his daughter's birth in October 1994, and the U.S. has twice issued Muthana an American passport based on those records.
The parents were nonetheless here under diplomatic passport, notwithstanding that they had not been expelled; the father's position had been terminated, but the documentation was not provided until after her birth.

However, depending on the whether the timing of the documentation is relevant, there could be cause for overturning the decision at the appellate level - and perhaps it should be. It has nothing to do with politics or your hatred for Muslims. And, of course, if she is a citizen, and actually fought for ISIS against U.S. troops, then she may have committed a crime and should be allowed back in not only as a citizen, but as one who has committed a crime (or several) and should be prosecuted for it.
 
  • Love
Reactions: the bull59
Oct 2019
4,868
1,850
International Falls, Minnesota
My point is that you have no point.

No one is "stomp[ing] all over our Constitution and laws" to recognize that birthright citizenship is constitutionally mandated.
I understand that's the interpretation, but I don't believe that was the intent when the amendment was passed. Are you referring to the 14th?