Thread: Birthright citizenship change would have wide effects

Originally Posted by GoodOleDays

The aliens will continue to cross our open borders no matter what, and America will never allow babies born here to go without a roof over their head, food in their bellies, and medical treatment when needed. So in order for the babies to be taken care of, their parent will be compensated financially no matter what laws are passed/enforced. In my opinion.

And that is exactly why they need to be deported immediately after the baby is born. If this circus continues, there will most certainly be kids in this country who are not being taken care of and have no food in their bellies, OUR KIDS! These kids belong to Mexico and they are the responsibility of Mexico.

If you have children of your own who need to be educated, fed, clothed, misc, are you going to turn around and neglect your own kids while you take care of your irresponsible neighbor's kids? No, because that would be downright stupid, it is the same thing that we have going on with the anchor babies. They need to be sent home, not given free citizenship and free everything else!

If illegals were reported and subsequently deported when they presented for their non emergency prenatal care,the anchor baby situation would not be what it is today.

Originally Posted by hattiecat

If illegals were reported and subsequently deported when they presented for their non emergency prenatal care,the anchor baby situation would not be what it is today.

Exactly.

Originally Posted by vistalad

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Birthright citizenship change would have wide effects

by Daniel González and Dan Nowicki -
Mar. 20, 2011 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic

Nearly 60 percent of Americans oppose changing the Constitution to deny citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants, according to a February poll by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center in Washington, D.C.

This question has a fatal flaw: There is no need to change the Constitution. There is, however, a need to take the time to read both the 14th Amendment and the statements made by its authors. The senator who insisted on including the citizenship clause - "subject to the jurisdiction..." - was crystal clear about that clause precluding any other allegiance.

The imortance of allegiance can be seen by looking at the Oath of Allegiance which all legal immigrants must swear, to become citizens, begins with, "I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen;"

Pollsters who ask people if we should change the Constitution are asking a false and misleading question.

You are absolutely correct, vistalad. Pollsters can always skew a poll by the way they ask a question. So in my mind, every poll is suspect unless the questions are given with the results.

The 14th Amendment gives Congress the power to enforce it. All that's required, to put an end to the anchor babies problem, is a simple, clarifying resolution from Congress.

And you are right again, the Constitution handles this problem. We must FORCE the Executive Branch to do their job. If it takes the states passing a Birthright Bill and making it go to the Supreme Court, I will take that, but I would rather that Congress clarify as you stated. It would be much clearer, without running the risk of the Supremes blowing the decision.

Giving birthright citizenship to children of illegal immigrants is just WRONG.
It should require that at least ONE parent be a legal resident or a citizen, otherwise this will go on forever as there is no obvious serious effort to halt illegal immigration into the U.S.A. active deportations of the ones that are already here. Major loophole that illegals will always take advantage of and have for 2 decades or so.

Hell, technically we don't even need congress to enforce the 14th Amendment. By executive order it COULD be done as there is NO current legal standing definition of it. The SC hasn't ruled on it as it stands on the issue and neither has Congress legislated the meaning.

Presidential Executive order COULD be used to define it, which of course then could be challenged by the SC and overturned or could be challenged by congress and have a legislated meaning added that says otherwise. But until that is done Executive Order would be enough to order no citizenship is confered by the 14th Amendment.

Of course Obama wouldn't ever try that tactic as if challenged the SC is the ONLY court that could then rule on it and enough to challenge it and overturn Obama's order in a heartbeat. Plus if he did Congress would have no choice but for any birth citizenship bill to put it to a floor vote and wouldn't be able to cover it up in a committee. Either way means a risky overturn if Obama tried to meddle and a quick one at that that would have far greater consequences such as if the SC came out and ruled it doesn't confer citizenship it would be a hands down ruling it never intended to and thus mean we can pull any false citizenships.