Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Illegals and Anchor Babies - Stop Granting Citizenship to Illegal's Children
New York TImes | December 2005

Posted on 09/12/2006 5:48:01 AM PDT by upier

December 27, 2005 -- A proposal to deny citizenship to babies born to illegal immigrants on U.S. soil ran aground this month in Congress, but it is sure to resurface — kindling bitter debate even if it fails to become law.

At issue is "birthright citizenship," provided for since the Constitution's 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868.

Some conservatives in Congress say the amendment was never intended to grant citizenship automatically to babies of illegal immigrants.

Rep. Nathan Deal (R-Georgia) tried to include a revocation of birthright citizenship in an immigration bill passed by the House in mid-December.

GOP House leaders did not let the proposal come to a vote.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism
KEYWORDS: aliens; illegal; immegration; immigrantlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last
This needs to be brought back into play. The 14th Amendment reads:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

When an illegal alien comes to this country they are not "subject to the jurisdiction therof" so their children born in the US are not citizens. They have no rights and should be deported with the parents and not become anchors for that illegal and their families.

1 posted on 09/12/2006 5:48:01 AM PDT by upier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: upier
GOP House leaders did not let the proposal come to a vote.

Hopefully, said leaders will be unemployed soon. Free up a job for a Republican.
2 posted on 09/12/2006 5:51:47 AM PDT by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: upier
IANAL, but illegal aliens are certainly 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States -- they're neither foreign diplomats (who possess diplomatic immunity) nor other 'immune' classes. If they weren't 'subject' you couldn't detain them or charge them with crimes - like illegal immigration, for example, surely?

And their children born here are born citizens - that's some heavy stare decisis to overturn.

I have no idea how any of the existing SCOTUS Justices would feel about a law that was on its face in contravention of the 14th Amendment and case law. I seriously doubt it would pass muster.

You'd have to pass a Constitutional amendement, I suspect. Good luck on that.

--R.

3 posted on 09/12/2006 5:59:47 AM PDT by RustMartialis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: upier

Well-to-do Koreans visit family or friends in LA in month eight of a pregnancy and stay long enough to give birth so that the child will be American and can then avoid compulsory ROK military service later on.


4 posted on 09/12/2006 6:06:25 AM PDT by wtc911 (You can't get there from here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RustMartialis
that's some heavy stare decisis to overturn.

More than anything, that will be the biggest problem. The intentions of the 14th may be clear, but how it has been applied in practice sets up a big hurdle. I've heard good arguments on how this can be fixed through legislation and without a Constitutional amendment, but just getting the legislation through will take jumping some high hurdles...one of the biggest being just getting the public to understand the scope and size of the problem.
5 posted on 09/12/2006 6:15:14 AM PDT by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

"... Koreans ... stay long enough to give birth so that the child will be American and can avoid compulsory ROK military service later on."

They may be in for a big surprise "later on." Here is what the U.S. embassy in Seoul says about this:

"South Korean men over the age of 18, including American citizens of Korean descent, are subject to compulsory military service. ... There have been several instances in which young American men of Korean descent, who were born and lived in the United States all of their lives, arrived in the ROK on a tourist visa only to find themselves drafted into the South Korean army."


6 posted on 09/12/2006 6:31:52 AM PDT by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: riverdawg

Warms my heart to hear that.


7 posted on 09/12/2006 6:35:39 AM PDT by wtc911 (You can't get there from here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: upier

Remember the 1996 immigration reform did away with anchor babies. Now if a "us citizen baby" is born to an illegal, the minor returns with the illegal when deported.

Additionally the citizenship of the minor may NOT be used to stay.

Of course immigration lawyers AND PARTICULARLY NON-LAWYERS WHO ARE ALLOWED TO PRACTICE BEFORE INS, have tried to game the system and claim the child has a "special need" to stay in the USA. (ADD, ADHD, illness, learning disability etc.) This is to accelerate the 10 year hardship visa requirment. (currently you hide the USA for 10 years and stay out of trouble and you get a hardship visa upon certain proofs.)

For those who don't know, ANYONE can play lawyer infront of the immigration service if you are accepted upon demonstrating knowledge. Thus even a paralegal can represent third parties without being a lawyer. This is how the left wing charities are able to represent illegals.


8 posted on 09/12/2006 6:38:05 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

note INS=BCIS=USCIS=Immigration service.


9 posted on 09/12/2006 6:39:54 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

"Warms my heart to hear that."

Mine, too. I recall that there are similar laws in Israel, Greece, Taiwan ... maybe others.


10 posted on 09/12/2006 6:50:19 AM PDT by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: upier

This should be back-dated about 30 years.

Revoke teh citizenship of all anchor babies after 1076.


11 posted on 09/12/2006 7:18:20 AM PDT by BenLurkin ("The entire remedy is with the people." - W. H. Harrison)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RustMartialis
IANAL, but illegal aliens are certainly 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States

Can an illegal alien, serve on a jury?

The authors of the 14th amendment specifically stated that in their argument during ratification of the 14th amendment.

There are other examples of how illegal aliens are not subject to the full jurisdiction of the United States.

12 posted on 09/12/2006 7:45:25 AM PDT by Marine Inspector (Customs & Border Protection Officer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: P-40

I say this half seriously.
It's the libs that claim the Constitution is a "living" document and interpretation should be adjusted to fit contemporary mores. Well, using their logic, one could say that the 14th amendment shouldn't apply here because the writers intended for it to apply to *legal* residents only. Not 12 million illegal invaders.

Realistically, it ain't gonna get fixed. Our only hope is to keep them out of the country before the babies are born. If we stopped providing free medical services, including birthing services, it seems to me that would make them think twice about coming here. Sounds cruel, but this "invasion" will destroy this country as sure as if it were an invasion resulting from armed hostilities.

Secure our borders and remove all of the incentives they have for coming here. If they can't get jobs and medical care, how long before they quit coming??? In other words, if they will be worse off here, they will stay away.


13 posted on 09/12/2006 7:58:14 AM PDT by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s...you weren't really there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: upier
When an illegal alien comes to this country they are not "subject to the jurisdiction therof" so their children born in the US are not citizens.

I couldn't agree more. Although, this article is old - December 27, 2005.
14 posted on 09/12/2006 9:59:26 AM PDT by CottonBall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s
If they can't get jobs and medical care, how long before they quit coming???

You have some good points. We really don't need a massive amount of laws or border patrol to control this situation. If we do exactly as you say, they will self-deport. 1 - heavy punitive employer penalties for hiring illegals and a mandatory check on legal status on every worker 2- remove all social services that taxpayers are funding. The reasons for them to be here will be eliminated, so they'll leave.
15 posted on 09/12/2006 10:02:02 AM PDT by CottonBall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

Why does such a simple course of action like you advocate seemingly escape the legions of politicians, talking heads, etc. when discussing this issue? The welfare bennies combined with fake ID industry has cost taxpayers untold amounts of $ in addition to bankrupting hospitals, straining school budgets, etc. Add to it all the numbers of companies that are evading taxes by hiring illegals and the picture gets even bleaker.......and they all know they can pay illegals substandard $ because the fedgov and local gov's have made it possible for the living expenses of their new amigos to be paid for by taxpayers..........whatta deal!


16 posted on 09/12/2006 10:08:10 AM PDT by american spirit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: upier
"Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."

Congress has more constitutional power granted it to restrict birthright citizenship than it does to infringe on the First and Second Amendment rights, which it often does so with impunity.

17 posted on 09/12/2006 10:08:18 AM PDT by azhenfud (He who always is looking up seldom finds others' lost change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-40
"That's some..."

"More than anything..."

Well wait one minute. I thought we had a living breathing constitution that adapts to changing social conditions, that allows abortions, separation of church and state. Now all of a sudden it isn't living and breathing enough to stop anchor babies? /sarc I disagree ...the pubic wants the borders closed...the public understands the problem.

18 posted on 09/12/2006 10:08:41 AM PDT by Jason_b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RustMartialis
"You'd have to pass a Constitutional amendement, I suspect."

You'd first need a Congress with balls "to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article". Section 5 already gives the lame@$$ Congress the power to restrict the Fourteenth's application to illegal alien offspring. They just don't possess the balls to enforce it.

19 posted on 09/12/2006 10:15:26 AM PDT by azhenfud (He who always is looking up seldom finds others' lost change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: P-40
Unless we amend the Constitution, babies born on U.S. soil will continue to be United States citizens. That will be difficult to change. However, there is no provision in the Constitution that the relatives of a citizen have any more immigration rights than anyone else in the world. The 'anchor' in anchor baby is just in the immigration laws...and those can be changed more easily than the Constitution.
20 posted on 09/12/2006 12:38:34 PM PDT by goldfinch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson