[Faceman675]

Originally Posted by savage560

Lets take on just the 14th amendment, you think any of the people involved with that, in 1868, envisioned women streaming across our boaders from Mexico, by the millions,unimpeded just to give birth to a baby here,so they could stay here because their child, born of them, illegal invaders, would be a citizen, by interpretation of that archaic interpretation, of that outdated law?An anchor baby,was that what the ratifiers could remotely envision?Or like we have here & what Canada recently changed their definition of ,a person born in their country,by Asian women,who were not Canadian citizens but those of China & other Asian nations, European ,whatever, hopping on jet planes 8+ months pregnant ,just to give birth to children on Canadian soil & proclaim their child was a Canadian citizen & they had the right to stay in Canada by that virtue.No they changed that law & so should we go back & either amend the archaic mindsets of the 18th & 19th century law makers,who's laws now are severely out of date with current implications.

The 14th is not the best choice for an example:
Section 5.
The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Many conservatives will argue that Sec 5 gives congress the authority to change birth right citizenship. Should we elect a republican president and keep control of both houses of congress there is a good chance that SCOTUS will get the chance to rule on it.