Trump wants to End Birth right Citizenship
Now he's gone and done it. I think its actually going to work for him. They would have to amend the 14th amendment, but its not a bad platform.
He is killing the repubs on this one, forcing them to take a stance![:D]
He is killing the repubs on this one, forcing them to take a stance![:D]
0
-
Congress didn't need to change the 2nd Amendment to inflict GCA68 on us; they just DID it, & courts have upheld it.
So, we don't need to change the 14th Amendment, Congress just needs to pass a law defining the citizenship requires more accurately.
I'm afraid that I have to join the "vote 'em all out" group; not a single member of Congress has the guts to introduce legislation that would stop anchor babies.
Neal0 -
quote:Originally posted by dennisnielsen
quote:Originally posted by AzAfshin
Actually a baby born in the US to foreign nationals gets to choose their citizenship at age 18, they are not forced to be American citizens.
As for changing the law, how about we change it and make it retroactive? Where would each and every one of you end up at?
How about YOU foot the bill and not us.
If not we all could give you the foot boot.[:)]
Unfortunately, since I came here legally, I am footing the bill. For myself, my family, and the illegal immigrants. The problem is not anchor babies, it's illegal immigration. The word is right there "ILLEGAL". If they are illegally here, then they should be sent back, with or without child.0 -
OK by me. 0 -
Who was President in 1965, and what party controlled Congress??????
http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship/original_intent.html
From the link:
'Babies born to illegal alien mothers within U.S. borders are called anchor babies because under the 1965 immigration Act, they act as an anchor that pulls the illegal alien mother and eventually a host of other relatives into permanent U.S. residency.'
Also, and something I have been saying for years:
'The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete. With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child. Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.'
And contemporaneous quotes from Senators:
In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by stating:
"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."
This understanding was reaffirmed by Senator Edward Cowan, who stated:
"[A foreigner in the United States] has a right to the protection of the laws; but he is not a citizen in the ordinary acceptance of the word..."
Birthright Citizenship is a relatively modern creation, and is not Constitutionally mandated.0 -
I personally do not see the 14th amendment as the problem.
Amendment XIV (1866)
Section 1.
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.
One perspective I agree with is:
"So what was to be the premise behind America's first and only constitutional birthright declaration in the year 1866? Simply all children born to parents who owed no foreign allegiance were to be citizens of the United States - that is to say - not only must a child be born but born within the complete allegiance of the United States politically and not merely within its limits."
http://www.federalistblog.us/2007/09/revisiting_subject_to_the_jurisdiction/
Also NO place in the Constitution is immigration addressed. Only Naturalization. So let's not forget that ALL the amendments including the 10th have weight.
The problem is SCOTUS. The Supreme Committee Of The United States. Once it granted it's self extra Constitutional authority, Judicial Review, it ceased being the arbitrator of what is Constitutional.
Couple this with the power to only hear cases it chooses and in the narrow perspective of the objection at hand thus ignoring the rest of the law.
Once the American people accepted the premise of balance on the court it ceased being a court. What is the rational of balancing the court with Justices that believe the Constitution means what it says and those that don't.
But to get back on topic. He may be correct but I think it should also include allowing the States to enforce Federal laws, even the ones the FEDS don't want to enforce.0 -
My wife came here legally & all three of our children were born before she became a citizen. What would you have their citizenship be? 0 -
quote:Originally posted by gruntled
My wife came here legally & all three of our children were born before she became a citizen. What would you have their citizenship be?
US citizens. A US citizen father and a legal immigrant mother bearing children in the USA makes a US citizen child in my book.0 -
and how many dozens of hospitals across the southwest went broke from all the free birthing 0 -
The Donald is not my first choice but I applaud his upfront attitude and bringing issues forward in a manner that cannot be ignored.
http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2015/08/22/illegal-immigration-is-the-disease-and-trumps-plan-is-the-cure-n2042266
"End birthright citizenship: Contrary to what you've probably read this week, the 14th Amendment was never intended to apply to illegal aliens and only started doing so in the 1980s because of a footnote slipped into a Supreme Court decision by Justice Brennan in 1982. In other words, this "right" supposedly given to foreigners who enter our country illegally by the 14th Amendment was lying undiscovered for 114 years and we still haven't had the whole court rule on the subject."
"Now, would Donald Trump or anyone else be able to round up and deport 11 to 20 million illegal aliens? No, but we don't catch every burglar either. However, whether you're talking about burglary or illegal immigration, having a clear cut penalty in place and enforcing it goes a long way toward reducing the number of people who are willing to break the law. The woman who has been here illegally for 15 years cheating on her taxes to get earned income tax credits she doesn't deserve, taking a job that could be held by an American citizen and collecting welfare is no more sympathetic than the burglar who has been robbing people's homes for 15 years and getting away with it. She might be a nice person if you get to know her, but the guy who stole your flat screen TV last week might also be fun to have a beer with at the local bar. Ultimately, she still broke the law, fully knowing what the penalty would be and guess what? The penalty is more than just. If you're just deported for coming here illegally, you got off pretty light, especially compared to places like Mexico where you can be put in jail for two years if you enter that nation illegally. "
"Contrary to what you may hear from some people, this is not a radical plan. If anything, it's basic common sense for anyone who agrees with the first three principles Trump said underlie his whole policy.
1. A nation without borders is not a nation. There must be a wall across the southern border.
2. A nation without laws is not a nation. Laws passed in accordance with our Constitutional system of government must be enforced.-
3. A nation that does not serve its own citizens is not a nation. Any immigration plan must improve jobs, wages and security for all Americans.
If enforcing our border, sticking to the laws on the books and making sure our immigration policies are good for the American people are now considered radicalism, it's hard to see how we're going to survive long-term as a nation. "0 -
quote:Passage of a new constitutional amendment would require a two-thirds "aye" vote in the House and Senate, plus the approval of the legislatures of three-quarters of the 50 states.
I see absolotely no reason why we would need a change in the 14th amendment to take care of something born from a criminal act. If we can take away 2nd amendment rights to those that commit a criminal act then why would we need to apply the 14th for those that are of criminal status.0 -
the last prez to so ANYTHING real about illegal immigration was Eisenhower with Operation undocumented alien....and i have been hearing the same old 11-12 million blind stupid guesstimate for YEARS now...who bets there is 40 million++ now really..we are 1/2 way to the Canadian border and many small towns are over 1/2 mexican now 0 -
Casper 1947 said:
"1. A nation without borders is not a nation. There must be a wall across the southern border.
2. A nation without laws is not a nation. Laws passed in accordance with our Constitutional system of government must be enforced.-
3. A nation that does not serve its own citizens is not a nation. Any immigration plan must improve jobs, wages and security for all Americans."
True, the wall law was passed years ago, funding was never provided; it never will be. Corruption is so deep in congress they would never dare fund a wall to actually be built. Corruption and illegals are where the money is for the political Elite.
(2) true, except for the current crop of political Masters, Martha Stewart went to jail for a white lie to the FBI, Christopher Dodd walked Scott free from corruption with Countrywide Mortgage, Harry Reid made millions on a corrupt land deal, Hillary will never be brought to any semblance of Justice under our nations laws.
(3) True, again the corruption in DC is so deep the very thought of doing what is right for US citizens is not even in the conversation about what laws to pass.0 -
This might make an interesting reference point for the candidates. Let's see who evolves.
http://townhall.com/columnists/katiekieffer/2015/08/24/16-grades-for-16-candidates-anchor-babies-n2042261?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&newsletterad=0 -
Now you know how the Palestinian Muslims and Christians feel. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by DaveJ
Now you know how the Palestinian Muslims and Christians feel.
.....no,why don't you tell us...[:o)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by pwillie
quote:Originally posted by DaveJ
Now you know how the Palestinian Muslims and Christians feel.
.....no,why don't you tell us...[:o)]
If the Hispanic invasion of illegals and the possibility of their being made legal along with their offspring bothers you...you know how the Muslim and Christian Palestinians feel.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
46 comments