Posted on 10/09/2015 5:13:07 PM PDT by Sean_Anthony
Minor children carry the national citizenship of their parents, no matter where they are born, just as a child born to American parents overseas is still an American citizen. There are no special circumstances for anyone
There is a problem of illegal immigrants delivering their babies on the US side of the southern border and demanding birth certificates that, they believe, would settle US citizenship on the children. With the upcoming hearing of a suit filed against Texas Department of State Health Services for a refusal to accept the unsecured matricula consular I.D. card issued by Mexican consulates, there is an answer that could resolve the problem.
First, despite media sources erroneously reporting that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States “guarantees the right of citizenship to children born here,” there is no such provision within the Constitution. Secondly, the matricula is an identification card for Mexican nationals, proving the individual carrying one, without accompanying valid visa, to be illegally present in the United States, notwithstanding they’re working, on welfare or possess a driver’s license.
I managed to make it through 64 years of life with my Pennsylvania “Certificate of Birth Registration” (three high schools, college, military, three airlines and the TSA, grad school, federal deputy and state peace officer qualification) before the slugs at the So-So Security Administration said “that ain’t a birth certificate; go get one if you want the money”.
Texans, are you listening?
Regarding the 14th amendment, why can’t congress passed a law which states that children born to illegals are not under the jurisdiction of the US? Problem solved without having to fight over the meaning of the 14th amendment.
Common Sense suggestions.
Were Texas to deliberately start doing this, it would provoke the judicial war that is necessary.
The important point is about the government of Mexico interfering in the case. This is the insanity of “minority rights” in the United States now: they are aggressively trying to control State governments through a variety of intimidation tactics which are typically aided and abetted by the Federal government under the rubric of protecting the civil rights of a minority...illegal aliens from Mexico.
Foreign nationals are a minority by definition. They deserve no extra rights as a Protected Class, simply because their home country insists on it as a method of extending their authority into ours.
It’s been proposed many times and shot down every time.
Recall the Birthright Citizenship issue from just a couple of months ago which Trump brought up.
Notably it has been shot down in Republican Majority congresses. Maybe when we get a new Speaker, that might change things.
The history of it goes back to the early 1990’s.
You expect Congress to vote on something substantial the majority of the people they represent agree with?
Crossing the border is dangerous and de facto child endangerment. Texas’ CPS will take your newly documented American from you at birth for cause and place them for Adoption with an American family.
Birth rates in AZ, NM, and CA would skyrocket.
When Mexico complains about taking children away from border crossers for child endangerment, smoke and tell them to butt out, not their concern how Texas deals with Texans.
They can’t have it both ways.
Autocorrect. Smile not smoke
Because then they could rape, rob and murder and not be prosecuted. Children born here to foreign diplomats aren't citizens because they and their parents have diplomatic immunity.
It’s never made sense to me that children of non-Americans born in the USA are considered American, no make that U.S. citizens. Yet children born to Americans abroad are considered Americans too, which makes sense as their parents are Americans/U.S. citizens. Yet the U.S. claims the the children of foreign citizens born here as its own. It seems like an ID theft me.
Bump for later read
Important
Apart from the practical reason already noted (a denial of jurisdiction over illegal aliens would be tantamount to a grant of "diplomatic immunity"), there is an argument it is beyond Congressional power to do so. The Supreme Court has stated:
"Congress having no power to abridge the rights conferred by the Constitution upon those who have become naturalized citizens by virtue of acts of Congress, a fortiori no act or omission of Congress, as to providing for the naturalization of parents or children of a particular race, can affect citizenship acquired as a birthright, by virtue of the Constitution itself, without any aid of legislation. The Fourteenth Amendment, while it leaves the power where it was before, in Congress, to regulate naturalization, has conferred no authority upon Congress to restrict the effect of birth, declared by the Constitution to constitute a sufficient and complete right to citizenship." U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 703 (1898)
Or, to phrase the argument another way: that which the Constitution grants (or protects) cannot be modified by Congressional act alone.
A Congressional act asserting that illegal aliens are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the U.S. for birth-citizenship purposes, while at the same time trying to affirm that such are still subject to U.S. laws for other purposes, would face much criticism as being self-contradictory.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.