Sen. Kyl Backs Anchor Baby Hearing

[peejay 327]

Sen. Kyl Backs Anchor Baby Hearing

by Connie Hair

08/02/2010

On CBS’ "Face the Nation” on Sunday, Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) backed the notion of a hearing to examine the constitutionality of granting citizenship to children of illegal aliens born on U.S. soil.

Kyl was asked by the host if he backed the “movement afoot” to “rescind the law that makes anyone born in the United States a U.S. citizen specifically aimed at the children of illegal immigrants.”

“There is a constitutional provision in the Fourteenth Amendment that has been interpreted to provide that, if you are born in the United States, you are a citizen no matter what,” Kyl said. “Now, there are limitations on that, for example, for the children of diplomats and so on. And so the question is, if both parents are here illegally, should there be a reward for their illegal behavior?”

Crafted in 1866 and ratified July 9, 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was aimed at settling citizenship issues of slaves born on U.S. soil that had been recently freed by the Civil War.

Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment states:

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.

Aliens in the United States legally or illegally are subject to the jurisdiction of their own country.

In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan, a member of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction that drafted the amendment, made absolutely clear the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment, 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.”

Rep. John Bingham of Ohio, regarded as the father of the Fourteenth Amendment, confirmed in a floor speech on March 9, 1866, in the House of Representatives:

“ find no fault with the introductory clause [s 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen..."

Granting citizenship to the children of illegal aliens came much later as the result of 20th Century activist Supreme Court decisions.

Kyl said that he backs a hearing to examine the constitutionality of the practice of granting citizenship to children of illegal aliens.

“What I suggested -- my colleague Lindsey Graham from South Carolina suggested -- that we pursue that. And what I suggested to him was that we should hold some hearings and hear first from the constitutional experts to at least tell us what the state of the law on that proposition is,” Kyl said.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=38353

[slim 1,530]

I've been trying to explain this to people forever. Foreigners aren't necessarily "under the jurisdiction" of the United States. Illegal aliens are foreigners.

[Ban Hammer 13,408]

i'd grant that legal permanent residents are as their status here is granted by the federal government - although that does not grant them citizenship, it could grant it to their offspring.

[evli1966 88]

I'd grant that legal permanent residents are as their status here is granted by the federal government - although that does not grant them citizenship, it could grant it to their offspring.

I agree

When the change does come this should be addressed as such but it should be examined carefully.

It is a shame when the US Constitution is abused by one party claiming it to be only their shield only to forgo it when it doesn't agree with their own agenda.

I believe it has been misinterpreted from the start so need to be changed so that in the future there is no misinterpretation.

[peejay 327]

It is a shame when the US Constitution is abused by one party claiming it to be only their shield only to forgo it when it doesn't agree with their own agenda.

And that agenda is future cheap illegal alien votes and perceived present Hispanic swing votes in 2010 and beyond. Apparently the party political commissars believe this is what will win elections for them even though it is pretty sleazy. Can you say..."self serving"? It is a gamble...I'm not sure if these assclowns will hit the jackpot, but they are rolling the dice. Whether you are a liberal or conservative or Republican or Democrat...using millions of foreign lawbreakers to achieve political hegemony is sleazy no matter how you slice and dice it. Is this what America has degenerated to?

This is why I am an Independent and proud of it. You get to call out these assclowns no matter who is in power. Stupid is what stupid does. Tell it like it is without the partisan spin.

So much for the open government that was promised. This issue will not even be allowed to be debated in a public forum in our congress. What are they afraid of? An informed public?

Feingold nixes GOP request for hearings into 14th amendment

Republicans may be calling for hearings into revising the 14th amendment, which guarantees citizenship to children of illegal immigrants, but it looks like they're not going to get 'em.

Russ Feingold, who chairs the Constitution Subcommittee, which would conduct the hearings, has "no plans" to allow them to go forward, his spokesman confirms to me.

And Feingold, in a statement, is reiterating that Federal immigration reform, not amending the Constitution, is the solution:

"We can and should address the problem of illegal immigration head-on without amending the Constitution. The way to do that is to pass bipartisan comprehensive legislation improving border security, protecting American jobs and addressing those currently in the country illegally. It is past time for Congress to resume the bipartisan effort that was started by President Bush and enact meaningful federal immigration reform."

Right now, the list of Republicans supporting hearings into whether to repeal birthright citizenship includes Chuck Grassley, Jon Kyl, and Lindsey Graham, who has hinted at a Constitutional amendment. Mitch McConnell and John McCain also seem supportive of hearings, though their backing is ambiguous.

Does Feingold's opposition mean no hearings on the issue? Unclear. The Constitution Subcommittee appears to be the first stop for efforts to amend the Constitution, But in theory, Senator Patrick Leahy, as chair of the overarching Judiciary Committee, could decide to go forward, despite Feingold's opposition. That seems unlikely, however.

More broadly, other Senate subcommittees, such as the one on immigration, could hold hearings on the issue itself, if not on whether to change the Constitution.

But it's looking less and less likely that any Constitutional tweaks are on the table. Conservative defenders of the Constitution will no doubt be deeply relieved! Oh, wait...

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/08/feingold_nixes_gop_request_for.html

Apparently any kind of immigration reform is off the table unless mass illegal alien amnesty is the main component. Just like any immigration and work authorization enforcement is put on hold unless illegal aliens already present are legalized with permanent residency and work authorization. Yes...this is self serving politics at its finest hour. The cart goes before the horse when cheap votes are at stake.

[mawilson 2,133]

i'd grant that legal permanent residents are as their status here is granted by the federal government - although that does not grant them citizenship, it could grant it to their offspring.

That's how it is in the UK - one needs an "indefinite leave to remain" in the UK in order

for their children to become UK citizens at birth.

[DEDixon 39]

no way the US can have a guest worker program while at the same time allowing guest worker's newborns citizenship.

if we security our border, i do think we need a way to tend to the crops. when the economy is good, i don't think we have enough people.

the comprehensive reform has to be far far far reaching in order to keep track of guest workers. maybe comprehensive reform modeled after Dubai/SKorea and the like.

[peejay 327]

no way the US can have a guest worker program while at the same time allowing guest worker's newborns citizenship.

I've stated that for years. If the clowns running the country are afraid to deport EWI illegal aliens and their spawn, who is kidding who that they have the balls to deport future overstaying guest workers and their inevitable spawn. They don't have the balls to hunt down and deport overstaying tourists and foreign workers now. What's up with that?

It's time both sides of the debate are honest with the American people. And I'm referring to Republicans that continually cheerlead for so called "temporary" foreign workers.

There is no such thing as a temporary guest worker as long as there is automatic birthright citizenship for their children. It is not compatible with "temporary".

What kind of moron thinks it is? And I stress the word "moron". Anybody willing to debate that point?

[evli1966 88]

I've stated that for years. If the clowns running the country are afraid to deport EWI illegal aliens and their spawn, who is kidding who that they have the balls to deport future overstaying guest workers and their inevitable spawn. They don't have the balls to hunt down and deport overstaying tourists and foreign workers now. What's up with that?

It's time both sides of the debate are honest with the American people. And I'm referring to Republicans that continually cheerlead for so called "temporary" foreign workers.

There is no such thing as a temporary guest worker as long as there is automatic birthright citizenship for their children. It is not compatible with "temporary".

What kind of moron thinks it is? And I stress the word "moron". Anybody willing to debate that point?

No one will.

They will post constitutional scholars in support of twisted terminology and deny anyone else has enough edumacation to say otherwise.