#101 | POSTED BY DANN - Thin skinned much? lol Read the rest of my comment. Sheesh. Here I'll copy it for you since you won't go find at seeing as you were too lazy to finish reading it in the first place..."(cheap shot I know, but it's funny. Yes I know other President's used them extensively and we can discuss that in a different thread)".
#90 | POSTED BY RCADE - The Naturalization Act prohibited one from becoming naturalized, a U.S. citizen, not from immigration. It didn't say no one from Asian descent can move to America and live here. But it did limit U.S. citizenship. Based on the reading of the law it seems Wong's parent's intention was to live here and have him born here thus qualifying him as a U.S. citizen. So I'm not so certain the assertion they were here illegally is accurate.
On a final note what I've found is several things.
First off, America acknowledges jus soli, by right of soil, as a basis for citizenship, regardless of plainly worded English in the Constitution.
Secondly, parents being illegal as it pertains to immigration laws and the 14th has not been argued for withholding citizenship in a case before the S.C. yet.
And finally, and I quote, "Almost all states in Europe, Asia, Africa, and Oceania grant citizenship at birth based upon the principle of jus sanguinis (right of blood), in which citizenship is inherited through parents not by birthplace". And the following "a study in 2010 found that only 30 of the world's 194 countries grant citizenship at birth to the children of undocumented foreign residents".
In light of these facts, I can see in our near future, immigration especially being at the fore-front of discussion at this time, citizenship being restricted to jus sanguinis with limited jus soli.