(Liberal Judge reaction depicted below.)
Any of them refusing to enforce the law could be impeached "for cause."
Posted on 08/25/2015 8:52:36 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp
The United States is being flooded with Immigrants, many of which have children here, and those children are currently regarded by the law as US Citizens. We refer to these children as "Anchor Babies", because they then allow for the rest of the family to be brought into the United States, thereby "anchoring" the family in the United States, where it otherwise would have no right to be.
An Interesting and clever way of addressing the problem has recently occurred to me. The 14th amendment was originally understood as not applying to Indians, because they were not regarded as "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. As a result, US Indians did not get automatic citizenship from the 14th amendment until 56 years later with the passage of the "Indian citizenship act of 1924".
So what does this have to do with "Anchor Babies"? Well, most of these Central/South American Immigrants are Indians, in the understanding of the Congress of 1868, and therefore if the "Indian Citizenship Act" was repealed, then the children born here to foreign Indians would no longer be citizens. Repealing the act would have no affect on US Indians because all US Indians have long since become American Citizens, and there are no Non-US-Citizen-Indians left in the United States.
The act has done it's job, and now no longer serves any other purpose other than allowing foreign Indians to claim citizenship for their children. If we repeal this act, which would only require a 50% vote in Congress, we wouldn't have to go through the fight necessary to amend the Constitution.
More importantly, it would CLARIFY the correct meaning of the 14th amendment, because it would be a defacto example of citizenship being denied from simply being born in the United States. It would be hard to argue with an actual and consistent example of such a thing, and then it would be obvious to everyone that if they can deny "Indians" not taxed, they can deny anyone else "not taxed", meaning all illegal or non domiciled foreigners (birth tourists) who have children in our country.
(Liberal Judge reaction depicted below.)
Any of them refusing to enforce the law could be impeached "for cause."
I have heard a few commentators mention that this practice of allowing the “anchor baby” policy is due to a 1967 Supreme Court decision. I have not looked it up.
Mexican condoms?
I know you’re being sarcastic but the “Indian” exception was later eliminated. Plus it originally applied to Indian tribes in AMERICAN territories and states with whom we had treaties.
We could make it a felony for parents to knowingly travel to the US to commit birthright citizenship. Not so fun for your young’uns being a citizen if you are rotting in a jail.
A 1982 decision by Leftist Justice Brannon who dropped automatic citizenship for anyone born here into a footnote of his decision. That unconstitutional footnote has cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars, jobs, our American culture, and our sovereignty.
I was originally being sarcastic when I thought up the idea, but I have since come to regard it as a rather sneaky but viable tactic which might actually work.
... but the “Indian” exception was later eliminated.
It was eliminated in 1924, just as I said in my post above.
Plus it originally applied to Indian tribes in AMERICAN territories and states with whom we had treaties.
Mexican/Central/South American Indians in American Territories do not get a higher level of consideration than do Indian Tribes in American Territories. Even less, I would think.
The point is, all such were banned from acquiring citizenship in 1868, and if we repealed the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, they would be banned from acquiring citizenship once more.
Such a plan would never pass the congress. Probably the plan i'm suggesting wouldn't either.
They are not Indians by any definition. The author is pretzeling in order to try and make a point.
> How to stop most “Anchor Babies” from being created.
Simple. Give Planned Parenthood to contract to stop the creation of Anchor Babies. /s
If we mak and enforce a policy that “Nobody gets into the country without our permission”, there would be no anchor babies.
And how are they not Indians? All native peoples to this continent were regarded as "Indians". I think Congress of 1868 would have definitely regarded them as Indians, and they would have definitely been excluded from Citizenship. 
A January 2012 report from the U.S. Census Bureau—“The American Indian and Alaska Native Population: 2010”—says that 175,494 Mexicans (Mexican, Mexican-American, Chicano) self-identified as American Indian, making them the fourth largest tribal group in the country, says Think Mexican.
Are all natives of all countries, Indians?
Who decides which countries original inhabitants were Indians?
What are the parameters?
I read that if a U.S. citizen has a baby in a foreign country, such as Mexico; and registers the birth at the U.S. consulate the child is a U.S. citizen and a citizen of the country of birth. Maybe it is time to employ a reverse anchor baby method against Mexico. An American man could sire a baby in Mexico. Make the baby a dual citizen, U.S. and Mexican. The American father could then buy ocean front property cheap and put the property in the name of the child. The American papa could provide support for the house and child (much cheaper than child support in the U.S.) via Western Union money transfers and have a beach front getaway.
The government of Mexico considers large portions of Mexico to be Indigenous Regions
http://www.cdi.gob.mx/regiones/regiones_indigenas_cdi.pdf
“Aztlán belongs to indigenous people, who are sovereign and not subject to a foreign culture”
http://www.nationalmecha.org/philosophy.html
Ethnic groups:
mestizo (Amerindian-Spanish) 62%, predominantly Amerindian 21%, Amerindian 7%, other 10% (mostly European)
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/mx.html
http://www.cdi.gob.mx/regiones/regiones_indigenas_cdi.pdf http://geo-mexico.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/mexico-population-density-map.jpg
90% of Mexicans are “Amerindian”
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.