Thread: Citizenship is More than Someone's GPS Location at Birth

Citizenship is More than Someone's GPS Location at Birth

By Bobby Eberle
January 28, 2011 7:13 am
46 Comments

An amendment to the U.S. Constitution which was put in place to make newly freed slaves instant citizens of the United States has been abused over the years in the case of children of illegal aliens. Have a child in the U.S., regardless if you are a citizen or not, and your child is automatically an American citizen. On the surface, it makes no sense, and two senators are proposing a resolution to eliminate the "anchor" baby practice once and for all.

As reported by The Hill, http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- ... resolution Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY) and David Vitter (R-LA) are "introducing a resolution this week that would amend the Constitution so that a person born in the United States could only become an American citizen if one or more of his or her parents is a legal citizen, legal immigrant or member of the armed forces." In a joint press release, Sen. Paul noted, "Citizenship is a privilege, and only those who respect our immigration laws should be allowed to enjoy its benefits." http://vitter.senate.gov/public/index.c ... &Issue_id=

For too long, our nation has seen an influx of illegal aliens entering our country at an escalating rate, and chain migration is a major contributor to this rapid increase - which is only compounded when the children of illegal aliens born in the U.S. are granted automatic citizenship," said Sen. Vitter. "Closing this loophole will not prevent them from becoming citizens, but will ensure that they have to go through the same process as anyone else who wants to become an American citizen."

According to the press release, Vitter and Paul "do not believe that the 14th Amendment confers birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens, either by its language or intent." The resolution is not a constitutional amendment. Rather, it seeks to make clear that "under the 14th Amendment a person born in the United States to illegal aliens does not automatically gain citizenship."

The effort to clarify birthright citizenship and end the practice of illegal aliens having "anchor" babies is not limited to Washington. According to an AP Story on GOPUSA, Arizona lawmakers "are proposing a bill that challenges automatic U.S. citizenship for children of illegal immigrants." http://www.gopusa.com/news/2011/01/28/a ... gals-kids/

Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, who filed the Arizona plan Thursday, said the goal isn't to get every state in the nation to enact such a law, but rather to bring the dispute to the courts in hopes of reducing the costs associated with granting automatic citizenship.

"The result of that is they immediately acquire the right to full benefits, everything from welfare to cheese, which increases the costs to the states," Kavanagh said. "And beyond that, it's irresponsible and foolish to bestow citizenship based upon one's GPS location at birth."

The law is sure to be challenged in the courts, but something needs to be done. The new reports note that opponents call the effort "mean spirited." What does that even mean? We are only supposed to pass laws that offer more government give-aways and make people feel good? What about passing laws that make sense? Or even better, how about enforcing the laws we already have.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if a law is being perverted to the extent that two people in this country illegally can have a child who then gains all the benefits of being an American citizen such as welfare and health care, then something is wrong with that law.

http://www.gopusa.com/theloft/2011/01/2 ... -at-birth/

"This would be the icing on the cake!"
People are frickin' Pissed! "GO PEOPLE!"

When this gets to court, I hope they bring up the American Indians. The reason being, that when the 14th amendment was enacted, the American Indians did NOT gain citizenship under the amendment. The reason cited was that American Indians, despite being born in the US, were NOT subject to the US Gov because their Tribal Counsels have prior claim. This should also be why babies born to illegals are NOT automatically citizens. The precedent is already set.




There has been a lot of talk recently by politicians, reporters, pundits, legal scholars, and others about the Fourteenth Amendment and citizenship. There is, as usual, a great lack of awareness of what this amendment has meant to American Indians.

Adopted in 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution states that:

"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."

The Amendment was intended to give citizenship to the African-American former slaves and not to Indians. Government agencies (the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Department of the Interior), and the courts (state, federal, and, ultimately, the Supreme Court) consistently held that the Fourteenth Amendment did not confer citizenship on Indians. Under the Constitution, and the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Constitution, Indian tribes are classified as "domestic dependent nations," and therefore, Indians were tribal citizenships, not American citizens.

In Elk versus Wilkins (1884) the Supreme Court considered:

The question then is, whether an Indian, born a member of one of the Indian tribes within the United States, is, merely by reason of his birth within the United States, and of his afterwards voluntarily separating himself from his tribe and taking up his residence among white citizens, a citizen of the United States, within the meaning of the first section of the fourteenth amendment of the constitution.

The Court concluded that Indians were not citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment. While recognizing that Indians were born in the United States in a geographical sense, they were not citizens just as children born within the United States of ambassadors or other public ministers of foreign nations were not citizens. The Court declared that citizenship must be directly bestowed upon the Indians by the United States. In other words, Indians were legal aliens in their own land.

http://www.streetprophets.com/story/201 ... 32417/1567

"Illegal Foreign Diplomats!"

The fact that they filed this is important

Keep in mind Dingy Harry ain't no way , no how going to allow this to
come up for a vote

But it needs to simmer and and boil for 2012

I first want it heard in the SC personally. But we really need to press for Kagan and Sotomayor to recuse themselves from the case as they were appointed by mr. savior of all illegals himself, the Traitor know as Obama. We should be able to at least force Sotomayor to recuse herself as she has been for years a contributor of hispanic rights movements in the US and a large supporter of such.... the same movements crying for legal status for illegal aliens and so forth.

Originally Posted by sugarhighwolf

When this gets to court, I hope they bring up the American Indians. The reason being, that when the 14th amendment was enacted, the American Indians did NOT gain citizenship under the amendment. The reason cited was that American Indians, despite being born in the US, were NOT subject to the US Gov because their Tribal Counsels have prior claim. This should also be why babies born to illegals are NOT automatically citizens. The precedent is already set.

That was very enlightening info.....