[SandRat]

hmmmmm,.....

[SandRat]

verrrry interesting,.........

[goldstategop]

Its insane. Those babies born here should be deemed citizens of their parents' countries, not American citizens. Citizenship should be granted only to lawful immigrants and their children should eligible for it only after a number of years has passed. No other country on earth makes citizenship a right. Birthright citizenship has been abused and its time to end it before it bankrupts this land.

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie.Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")

[Barte45]

I have always been against birthright citizenship. Where you were born shouldn't mean anything, where you legally live should.

[Michael.SF.]

He argues the words “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” suggests the 14th Amendment does not apply to children of undocumented immigrants

Why take the chance, that the above argument will fail?

I say go for it with a Amendment. The first side to get on board with this, will stake out the territory for the anti illegal immigrant contention.

[Texas_Jarhead]

"“To deny citizenship to a defenseless child who had no say in being born here would be absurd. It would be unjust.”"

Denying her illegal anchor baby citizenship is unjust. That's rich.

[adamsjas]

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States.”

I predict trouble sneaking any change to this past the Supreme Court.

You would have to make some contention base on the middle phrase, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". What exactly that phrase means may be subject to discussion. Presumably the children of Diplomats would not be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States even if they were born here. But to say the child of an illegal immigrant born nere is not subject to the Jurisdiction of the US is going to be a stretch.

It sounds to me like a constitutional ammendment would be needed.

[MissAmericanPie]

Time to call a few congress critters?

[heldmyw]

It would seem to me that an illegal alien is technically 'not here'. In any event, immediate deportation would (should) be the result of discovery. No trial, just a hearing to protect any legal aliens that may have run afoul of the system. Any children of illegals, irrespective of their birth coordinates would be the responsibility of the parents and the country of origin of the parents.

Criminals who violate U.S. sovereignty shouldn't qualify for rights and privileges when so many honest immigrants patiently go through legal channels to become real citizens. More criminals we do not need

[rellimpank]

--serious subject that this is , it still reminds me of the retort of the Duke of Wellington when someone suggested that since he was born in Dublin he was Irish--

--he replied that being born in Ireland no more made one Irish than being born in a stable made one a horse---

[BunnySlippers]

Larry Elder has been doing a lot on this lately ... as well as Doug MacIntyre. KABC radio.

[Ursus arctos horribilis]

As I understand it, after the civil war and during reconstruction (ugh, I hate that word) the birthright clause was kicked into the 14th amendment to insure that children born of ex slaves would be automatically become citizens. This was laudable and a good thing, but, it sure as hell did not take into account of being over run by criminal trespassers whom broke the nations laws to get their kids born here.

It is still debated if the 14th amendment is even legal, as it applies only to the states, not to the federal government.

It is time to give the 14th amendment a damned good test case before SCOTUS, after a conservative or two are appointed as justices.

[Congressman Billybob]

This is exactly what I and others have written in FreeRepublic threads six months or more ago. This is within the power of Congress, precisely because the 14th Amendment empowers Congress to enforce it thought appropriate legislation. This sounds like appropriate legislation to me.

John / Billybob

[Anti-Bubba182]

I wonder is this is merely a politcal ploy for those co-sponsers in the most heavily affected areas? Does this have any chance of becoming law?

[JoeSixPack1]

Rather than curb illegal entry into our country, our law makers would have us lose a birthright? That's Insane no matter how it's packaged.

[janetgreen]

It would be unjust

What is REALLY "unjust" is that American taxpayers are forced to pay the billions of dollars it takes to support these "anchor babies" and their extended families.

[snowman1]

But Flores (an illegal alien) about to give birth, and who's going to pay for this illegals baby????? NO SECOND GUESSES.

[cartman90210]

...Flores and her husband Josi, also here illegally from Mexico, doubt that ending birthright citizenship will keep undocumented immigrants from coming to the United States because most come for jobs, not to have babies.

Thank you for your expert opinion, Miss "Legal Expert" Flores. I guess that means you won't mind should the law be changed. Your anchor-baby-to-be will most likely come in under the wire, but the next three or four or five or ten...maybe not so lucky.

[Leatherneck_MT]

Throwing the baby out with the bathwater?

More like throwing the baby out with all the immigrants.

I hope congress at least takes into consideration all those LEGAL immigrants. The only anchor babies that shouldn't be naturalized are those whose parents are here illegally.