Bill would deny U.S. citizenship to children of illegal immigrants

NCTimes ^

[afnamvet]

Mexicans vote the majority on the Democratic ticket.

You mean we have Mexicans voting in our general election as Democrats?

[steve-b]

You need to read the text of Article III, Section I. My explanation in the previous message will help.

[Centurion2000]

All Congress would have to do is include in the bill a section saying that this issue is not reviewable by the federal courts and there is not a dang thing the Supreme Court could do about it.

Think they have the spine for that ?

[Happy2BMe]

"but does it allow the parents who are illegals to stay??? "

===============================

#18

[Happy2BMe]

Yes. Where have you been?

[afnamvet]

My sarcasm tag was inadvertently left off.

[Publius6961]

As well they should, because the 14th Amendment says that if you're born here, you're a citizen.

I agree with you (today).

There is no question in my mind, however, that if you and I had presented that argument in 1789, we would be laughed out of town.

[steve-b]

Could it be the argument will be since they are not legally born here, they are not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof"?

That's pretty much the only argument that can be made to support such a law. One can make a decent case that this reflects original intent (the freedmen, who were the people whose rights were primarily addressed, were legally present in the country; the various Amerindian tribes, who lived on reservations that were nominally separate nations under an American protectorate, were not considered citizens until Congress revisited that issue by statute).

[COEXERJ145]

Congress has the authority to regulate the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court (explicitly stated) and the authority to regulate the original and appellate jurisdiction of lesser federal courts (implicit in the statement that such lesser federal courts are the creatures of Congress).

Quite correct but the Constitution then goes on to list what comprises the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction. When Congress attempted to add to that jurisdiction, the result was the case of Marbury v. Madison. (Of course that was not the issue that brought Marbury v. Madison to the SC but that was the result of the Court's ruling.) Marshall said that Congress does not have the power to give the Supreme Court new original jurisdiction without amending the Constitution.

At the very least, Congress should attempt to remove the Court's ability to hear such cases. If that doesn't work, there are always other options available but the easiest one should be tried first.

[tumblindice]

And all persons--not just citizens--within our boundaries or subject to our jurisdiction are entitled to the protection of our laws. Even the Romans didn't go that far.
But if the Dums went to, say, effin Iran (I hear they need human shields, Go!) and tried their act there, they'd be dog-meat before sundown.
Just one reason why these US of A make up the greatest country in the history of the world. And our flag rocks too. Why be modest?

[steve-b]

Quite correct but the Constitution then goes on to list what comprises the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction.

Yes, it carves out certain areas of law which Congress may not delegate to any of the lesser courts it may choose to create. That has nothing to do with the matter before us, as none of those areas of law are involved here.

[NEBUCHADNEZZAR1961]

I'm sure President Bush will come out and give his support to this bilL!

[Happy2BMe]

I guarantee you those on the front line in Iraq and Afghanistan don't cherish the thought that while they are bleeding and dying in a rat hole on the other side of the planet their home country is being overrun by an unarmed invasion.

[TheBattman]

Anchor Baby.......

[Happy2BMe]

What year?

[MEGoody]

"the 14th Amendment says that if you're born here, you're a citizen"

Yep, it does. It doesn't say, however, that little Maria's mother gets to stay in the U.S.

I say keep the kid, send momma back to Mexico. The government would only have to do this once or twice to cut way down on women sneaking over the border to have kids just to get to stay in the U.S.

[Happy2BMe]

Can 85% of Americans be wrong?

==============================

Which of the following is the best way to solve the illegal immigration problem?

Seal and militarize the borders
49.1%
Beef up and enforce existing law
35.6%
Some form of guest worker program
10.4%
Other
3.0%
Undecided/Pass

[Happy2BMe]

pong

[Publius6961]

"Citizenship belongs to a person wherever they are born," said Katherine Cullion, an attorney with the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, a Latino rights group. "The most basic, fundamental right is the right to citizenship in the country where you were born."

I would venture an unconfirmed (but confident) guess that the only country where an arrogant and presumptuous lawyer type would make such a statement is the United States of America.

In other words, BS!
Is it true of Mexico?

[Clemenza]

I'd have to check on Mexico. I do know that when one of my Professors fled Austria following the Anschluss, he found it much easier to get into Mexico than the U.S.