Birthright Citizenship

[Fandango 1,440]

So we don't have a whole class of people without citizenship status already?

The onus is never on the individual anymore.

Sadly, you are so right....

[peejay 327]

Not particularly....don't you think by disallowing birthright citizenship, the onus is on the mother to make sure she's in a place where her child will not be born as a child without a country?

Steven would like the gullible, ignorant, and stupid to believe that without birthright citizenship all these children of illegal aliens and birth tourists would be stateless. That is total nonsense. Fact is these children are the citizens of the country of origin of their parents.

[Darnell 8,479]

children, yes. When the mom and child leave USA after the birth, the child can make the claim to USCitizenship anytime prior to age 18 (that's my idea, unsure and uncaring of what the current law says)

it's a booming business (here in USA) for chinese pregnant woman tourism (no, I'm not kidding)

Edited October 28, 2011 by Darnell

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Not particularly....don't you think by disallowing birthright citizenship, the onus is on the mother to make sure she's in a place where her child will not be born as a child without a country?

Very few children born to parents of country x in country y would not be granted citizenship in country x. The potential stateless kid argument is a red herring. I'd have no problem making provisions for those few and far between exceptions similar to how Germany, for example, does that.

[sachinky 465]

I think the child must have either a US citizen as a parent or both parents must be LPRs.

Yeah, this one gets my vote.

Very few children born to parents of country x in country y would not be granted citizenship in country x. The potential stateless kid argument is a red herring. I'd have no problem making provisions for those few and far between exceptions similar to how Germany, for example, does that.

Spot on, as well.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

No -- that is a magnet for illegal immigrants, which several other advanced nations (Canada, and UK among them) have dropped!

Edited October 28, 2011 by Saddle Bronc

[peejay 327]

No -- that is a magnet for illegal immigrants, which several other advanced nations (Canada, and UK among them) have dropped!

I know nothing about Canada's laws in this regard, but I read the following excerpt on MSN this morning:

The United States is the only country in the developed world other than Canada that grants jus soli or birthright citizenship.

http://rockcenter.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/10/28/8511587-born-in-the-usa-birth-tourists-get-instant-us-citizenship-for-their-newborns

[Misha & Ira 113]

Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868.

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.

Enough said.

Oddly I find myself in agreement with DFH and LI on this...

Now...I do not think that my money should be used to fund the births of others...I disagree that she should have gotten medicaid.

[peejay 327]

Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868.

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.

Enough said.

Oddly I find myself in agreement with DFH and LI on this...

Now...I do not think that my money should be used to fund the births of others...I disagree that she should have gotten medicaid.

As I stated earlier, the original intent of the 14th Amendment was not to grant citizenship to hordes of children of illegal aliens or temporary visitors in the jet age. Not to mention that the USA (and the world) has changed quite a lot since 1868. According to the following article it was passed to ensure that freed slaves and their children were not disenfranchised. In any event this interpretation giving birthright citizenship is outdated and not in the best interests of the USA (which borders a third world country).

The U.S. law dates back to the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, ratified after the Civil War to ensure that all freed slaves and their children would be American citizens.

http://rockcenter.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/10/28/8511587-born-in-the-usa-birth-tourists-get-instant-us-citizenship-for-their-newborns

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Anchor Babies suck!

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

Hands off the 2nd Amendment, but the rest are negotiable.

[Misha & Ira 113]

I agree, anchor babies do suck. But what is the alternative? Change the constitution?

Why do we care so much about immigration anyway? It is because of all the give aways we have. I say stop giving away our money, this will do more to curb the droves of aliens coming here.

[Danno 1,228]

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.

.

- IF the intent was simply -anyone born- in the US.... the following condition would not have been added.-and subject to the jurisdiction thereof ...these children are under the subject and protection of their parents (and their) country of citizenship.

-There are exceptions to this rule already spelled out, Children of ambassadors I think is one.

- The Constitution is designed to be altered and I think clearly with ease of transportation what it is.... now is the time.

-It seems the vast majority would favor a more commonsense redefining of this issue, why is there no steam behind getting it done?

[Brother Hesekiel 2,236]

I'm for changing the Constitution (in regard to the 2nd. and the 14th.), but know enough about this that this is pure fiction. Forget proposing such an Amendment, try getting at least 75% (3/4) of all voters of all 50 states to agree to an Amendment that takes away rights of U.S. citizens, in a country with strong Hispanic roots.

[peejay 327]

I agree, anchor babies do suck. But what is the alternative? Change the constitution?

Why do we care so much about immigration anyway? It is because of all the give aways we have. I say stop giving away our money, this will do more to curb the droves of aliens coming here.

Obama has stopped deportations of all but felons & high misdomeanors and almost completely stopped workplace raids. In any case the illegals snared in these few raids are let go. In addition to that all those already in deportation proceedings will be released and given work authorization. If that pisses you off, then don't vote for this traitor and his cronies. You don't necessarily have to vote Republican, just don't support this treason against the American people by voting for this traitor. He and his cronies care more for the Hispanic voting block than they do the best interests of all Americans. As long as the American people keep supporting this self serving treason by politicians by voting for them, nothing will ever change.