A few of our stories and columns are now in front of the paywall. We at The Chief-Leader remain committed to independent reporting on labor and civil service. It's been our mission since 1897. You can have a hand in ensuring that our reporting remains relevant in the decades to come. Consider supporting The Chief, which you can do for as little as $3.20 a month.
To the editor:
Many people picking our fruits and vegetables are here illegally. Employers hire them because they can get away with paying them even less than the pitiful minimum wage.
Others without authorization to be in the country work construction jobs. They are not paid anything near what union-represented, U.S.-born construction workers get.
The overwhelming majority of murders and sex offenses committed in this country are by people born in this country. Also, rapists are sex offenders. By listing them separately, a recent letter confounds the issue through redundancy ("Declaring war," The Chief, May 23).
Equating people who come here to work and live in peace with an army invading to conquer us is the antithesis of logical thinking.
Finally, the 14th Amendment says in plain English that if you were born here and you are under the jurisdiction of the U.S. government or one of its states, you are a citizen. Another letter writer again twists the English language into a pretzel in his attempt to explain why the 14th Amendment does not mean what it actually says ('Due Processing," The Chief, May 23) .
Richard Warren
1 comment on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
J.Donne
Richard Warren’s letter titled “Lost in Translation” is a misinterpretation of the facts surrounding birthright citizenship, while the letters titled “Due Processing” and “Declaring War” present opposing viewpoints.
First and foremost, the interpretation of the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is highly debatable in legal circles. The Supreme Court of the United States will clarify its intended meaning in early summer. Continuously misstating letters regarding the application of the 14th Amendment in today’s context is, as you rightly point out, illogical. However, you conveniently omitted a crucial word in the aforementioned letter; it is superfluous!
Thursday, May 29 Report this