GOP mulls ending birthright citizenship

THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | November 4, 2005 | By Stephen Dinan

[.cnI redruM]

House Republicans are looking closely at ending birthright citizenship and building a barrier along the entire U.S.-Mexico border as they search for solutions to illegal immigration.

A task force of party leaders and members active on immigration has met since the summer to try to figure out where consensus exists, and several participants said those two ideas have floated to the top of the list of possibilities to be included either in an immigration-enforcement bill later this year or in a later comprehensive immigration overhaul.

"There is a general agreement about the fact that citizenship in this country should not be bestowed on people who are the children of folks who come into this country illegally," said Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican, who is participating in the "unity dinners," the group of Republicans trying to find consensus on immigration.

[.cnI redruM]

Ending the anchor baby scam would be a big help.

[Khepera]

YEA!! I HOPE THEY SUCCEED

[unixfox]

That's a step. Now end the free healthcare, schooling, food stamps, housing and every other freebie that these ILLEGALS get.

[GrandEagle]

House Republicans are looking closely at ending birthright citizenship
I believe that will take a Constitutional amendment. Simply reworking the amendment to allow those born here while their parents are LEGALLY here would be OK with me. Obviously that is what the founders meant.

Cordially,
GE

[smith288]

Im mixed on that one. I have seen successful indian (from India) have kids here and make something valuable of themselves and become productive segment of society.

I would feel bad for these people who lose that chance to become part of our country because of our institutional lack of border control.

Thats the real problem. Stop them at the border and the anchor baby scam wont occur.

[.cnI redruM]

Yeah, make living here cost something. Kind of like it does for actual citizens.

[hershey]

Yes!!!!

[.cnI redruM]

Interesting. I wasn't aware the process was that difficult.

[brothers4thID]

I believe you are right. The 14th Amendment guarantees the rights of citizens to anyone born or naturalized in this country.

[AmishDude]

Unfortunately, it will take a constitutional amendment to do this. Read the 14th amendment. A literalist can't help but conclude that citizenship is conferred by birth on US soil. Maybe an originalist could argue that it's not what they meant, but it's tough to argue.

Of course, it will go nowhere for two reasons: One, they're also bringing up issues like a "wall" that has an intimidating tone to it and distract from the main issue. Two, with that blowhard Tancredo in charge, it'll be nothing but a platform for the stroking of his ego.

[umgud]

bump

[Killborn]

If they just write a law without a Constitutional Amendment, I'd be so furious.

[GrandEagle]

The constitution specifically addresses this issue.
I don't think the founders ever envisioned the time where we would be flooded with illegals who were welcomed in by our own government. The provision would have to be reworded. One of the few oversights in our Constitution, that should be easy to correct. I can't imagine any politician who would go on record as wanting to allow illegals who have children here to remain here because their children are automatically citizens. - But then, stranger things have happened!

Cordially,
GE

[.cnI redruM]

That would be a cop out. They'd do it knowing full well Judge Roberts would get the hand grenade dropped in his lap six months hence.

[Killborn]

If they want to end the anchor baby problem, they have to amend the US Constitution. Anything else is blatantly not.

[GrandEagle]

I don't see any way around it. Even for those who like the elastic Constitution.

If they will keep it simple and to the point it should be a "no brainer".

[rhombus]

If they just write a law without a Constitutional Amendment, I'd be so furious.

It would be the pinnacle of hypocrisy. The right way to do it is to write an amendment, although I'm not sure what that amendment would say... you are only a citizen if your parents are citizens?? It would be a hard sell and would likely spend a lot of money and go down.

[Vicomte13]

"The Founders"?

Birthright citizenship became part of the Constitution in the 1860s, not the 1780s.

Building the wall and intercepting those who cross is doable by executive act. No law is needed. Indeed, the border states could do it, with federal military and financial assistance.

Ending birthright citizenship would require a Constitutional amendment, and is a bad idea.

Close the border and regularize everyone on the US side of it. There will not continue to be an influx after that, and you will not need to worry about the birthright business.

[Killborn]

Grand Eagle had a good solution: citizenship conferred only for legal aliens.

[jackbenimble]

The 14th Amendment guarantees the rights of citizens to anyone born or naturalized in this country.

You left out a clause. They not only need to be born here but they also need to be "subject to the jurisdiction of". Now we have repeatedly argued in this forum about what that particular clause means so I am not going to engage in that discussion again but the bottom line is that it will mean whatever the Congress and the Courts decide it means. The Constitution gives solely to Congress the power to establish our immigration policy. The Constitution also gives to Congress the power to limit the jurisdiction of the Courts including the Supreme Court. It seems to me that if Congress has enough desire, they can limit birthright citizenship with action that falls short of a Constitutional Amendment.