No citizenship for US-born migrant kids

[^_^ 5,021]

That is your opinion, and luckily you are still entitled to have it.

Shut yo mouf, lib!

[engineer21 51]

Shut yo mouf, lib!

is that english?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

For some reason I have an inexplicable urge to post a Rick Astley video.

[^_^ 5,021]

is that english?

it is whatever you want it to be.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Anyone who says the 14th amendment entitles an illegal alien child or even a legal alien child to birthright citizenship, has not read the hearings, the writings, or anything that went along with the 14th amendment. They're plain ignorant in every way.

Well, we should just dismantle the Supreme Court and throw away any or all previous rulings that you find ignorant. Like this one:

United States v. Wong Kim Ark

In a 6-2 decision, the Court held that under the Fourteenth Amendment, a child born in the United States of parents of foreign descent who, at the time of the child's birth are subjects of a foreign power but who have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States and are carrying on business in the United States, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under a foreign power, and are not members of foreign forces in hostile occupation of United States territory, becomes a citizen of the United States at the time of birth.

.....

Rationale

The 14th Amendment's citizenship clause, according to the court's majority, had to be interpreted in light of English common law tradition that had excluded from citizenship at birth only two classes of people: (1) children born to foreign diplomats and (2) children born to enemy forces engaged in hostile occupation of the country's territory. The majority held that the "subject to the jurisdiction" phrase in the 14th Amendment specifically encompassed these conditions (plus a third condition, namely, that Indian tribes were not considered subject to U.S. jurisdiction^[4]) - and that since none of these conditions applied to Wong's situation, Wong was a U.S. citizen, regardless of the fact that his parents were not U.S. citizens (and were, in fact, ineligible ever to become U.S. citizens because of the Chinese Exclusion Act). The opinion emphasized the fact that "...during all the time of their said residence in the United States, as domiciled residents therein, the said mother and father of said Wong Kim Ark were engaged in the prosecution of business, and were never engaged in any diplomatic or official capacity under the emperor of China".

Since Wong was a U.S. citizen from birth, the restrictions of the Chinese Exclusion Act did not apply to him. An act of Congress, the majority held, does not trump the Constitution; such a law "cannot control [the Constitution's] meaning, or impair its effect, but must be construed and executed in subordination to its provisions."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

[^_^ 5,021]

United States v. Wong Kim Ark

No one called Wong Kim Ark should be allowed to bring suit against the United States anyway. That should be a privilege reserved for actual Americans.

[Ban Hammer 13,619]

That's not the point, charles. The point is they will need their birth certificate to immigrate to another country. They might need the birth certificate for many other reasons. Beside plenty of Mexicans immigrate to other countries beside USA. If it's so unimaginable that a Mexican might go anywhere beside America: These same Mexicans might want to move to America legally down the road.

your flaw is assuming they'll want to immigrate to another country

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Well, we should just dismantle the Supreme Court and throw away any or all previous rulings that you find ignorant. Like this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

The SCOTUS has been wrong before on a few different occasions in their 'interpretations.'

There's a difference in 'reading' what something says and 'understanding' what something mens based on the intent.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

No one called Wong Kim Ark should be allowed to bring suit against the United States anyway. That should be a privilege reserved for actual Americans.

Russel Pearce has close ties with White Supremists groups. They're the ones that financed SB1070 and this one as well. They are exploiting this opportune moment of economic crisis to use populist resentment towards foreigners, but their long term goal is to prevent the browning of America.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

I'm waiting for the day when Supreme Court justices are chosen from the ranks of VJ members. What fun.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The SCOTUS has been wrong before on a few different occasions in their 'interpretations.'

There's a difference in 'reading' what something says and 'understanding' what something mens based on the intent.

On what legal expertise are you expressing such authority?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I'm waiting for the day when Supreme Court justices are chosen from the ranks of VJ members. What fun.

I think that's what the Founding Fathers had in mind.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

I think that's what the Founding Fathers had in mind.

How terribly modern of you.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

How terribly modern of you.

Phil Collins told me so, so, so-dio.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Oh, naff off you.