美国联邦第五巡回法院的左逼亚裔法官James Ho有一篇巨著叫《Defining “American”》，中文题目是“论月子中心的合法性”。此长篇大论深入美国宪法第14修正案第一节，讨论美国出生公民权。这里是14修正案第一节的全文：
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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
“论月子中心的合法性”（以下简称“月子”）一文，从三百年前死猫五百年前死狗谈起，把属地公民权如何从英国法系继承过来，怎么又写进美国宪法了，后来美国高院又怎么解释这条宪法。洋洋洒洒十几页，犯了臭老九喜欢炫耀有知识和说话罗嗦的怪癖。
这里我们就节选“月子”一文中关于管辖权（subject to the jurisdiction thereof）几段话。为什么挑这几段？因为这是对于出生公民权争议最大的地方。宪法说受美国政府管辖的人在美国领土生的娃都是美国人。于是关于“受美国政府管辖”的四壁大战就这么展开了。
这里是Ho法官的意见。
We begin, of course, with the text of the Citizenship Clause. To be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. is simply to be subject to the authority of the U.S. government.[8] The phrase thus covers the vast majority of persons within our borders who are required to obey U.S. laws. And obedience, of course, does not turn on immigration status, national allegiance, or past compliance. All must obey.
。。。。。
Of course, when we speak of a person who is subject to our jurisdiction, we do not limit ourselves to only those who have sworn allegiance to the U.S. Howard Stern need not swear allegiance to the FCC to be bound by Commission orders. Nor is being “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. limited to those who have always complied with U.S. law. Criminals cannot immunize themselves from prosecution by violating Title 18. Likewise, aliens cannot immunize themselves from U.S. law by entering our country in violation of Title 8. Indeed, illegal aliens are such because they are subject to U.S. law.
此处说受管辖的意思是：不管你是五美分还是五角人民币，不管你是把美国当爹还是当美国人爹，不管你认为美国月亮就是圆还是痛恨万恶的美帝，只要人在美国，你基本上就必须要受美国政府法律的制约， 就“subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S.。这不是废话吗？入乡随俗入境问禁的古训咱就不提了，到一个地方必须受当地法律管辖这事还能以我的喜好决定？从常识来说，你进入一个国家，绝大多数情况下你就受这个国家政府管辖了，和你如何进入这个国家，和你个人对该国的感觉没有一毛钱的关系。受不受这个国家政府管辖你做不了主，真的做不了主。你天天鼓吹open border也挡不住当地政府来管你，不信你可以试试。
那么有没有例外呢？有没有可能进了美国还不受美国政府管？有。Ho法官举了几个例子：
Foreign diplomats enjoy diplomatic immunity,[12] while lawful enemy combatants enjoy combatant immunity.[13]Accordingly, children born to them are not entitled to birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment.
原来外交官和歪国军队是不受管的。难怪沙特可以在大使馆开人体解剖课。
辣么，非法移民呢？从常识讲，非法移民也受美国政府管辖的，不然还不真成了open border了。但是有人不服气啊，Ho法官清晰的指出：
This sweeping language reaches all aliens regardless of immigration status.[38] To be sure, the question of illegal aliens was not explicitly presented in Wong Kim Ark. But any doubt was put to rest in Plyler v. Doe (1982).
Plyler construed the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, which requires every State to afford equal protection of the laws “to any person within its jurisdiction.” By a 5–4 vote, the Court held that Texas cannot deny free public school education to undocumented children, when it provides such education to others.
不少公号撒谎说美国高院从未对非法移民的管辖权问题发表过意见，Ho法官用上面这两段分析精准地打了这些撒谎公号的脸。
因为非移subject to the jurisdiction，所以根据宪法，他们在美国出生的孩子也应该有公民权！Law and order万岁！
Ho法官花了很多笔墨强调只要宪法不改，就很难从历史，逻辑，和事实的角度去剥夺非法移民在美国出生孩子的公民权。吐槽君算是看明白了，这Ho法官家里一定是开月子中心的，而且还是给非移用的那种。
重大勘误
Ho法官是特朗普总统提名到第五巡回法院，也是受到右派们高度推荐的大右臂。他家里也没有开月子中心。他写的“月子”分析文是基于很简单的常识以及law and order的理念，水平真是比造谣撒谎的野鸡公号不晓得高到哪里去了。
Ho法官的文章链接在这里： https://thefederalist.com/2015/08/25/defining-american-birthright-citizenship-and-the-original-understanding-of-the-14th-amendment/
PDF版： https://www.gibsondunn.com/wp-content/uploads/documents/publications/Ho-DefiningAmerican.pdf
吐槽君
承蒙读者错爱，最近不少后台留言，有人说已经看到好几个群有人跟吐槽君喊话，要求吐槽某种怪现状。吐槽君终日为生计奔波，没时间看那么多群，也不一定在您喊话的群里，如果您想爆料、点播，欢迎在公众号后台给我留言或请发信至
[email protected] 。
我们也欢迎各类媒体转发，转发时请务必注明文章出处。
关注本公号，请扫码订阅：
继续阅读
阅读原文