I saw where the plane was coming from and that was my first thought. LOL
How CONNNNNNVEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENIENTTTTT!!!!!!!
She wasn't "in" the United States until she cleared customs, or at least until the plane touched ground. Much like Cubans who have no claim to asylum until their feet actually touch US soil. Just being enroute either in the US territorial waters or US airspace doesn't count. And she was not "residing" in any state.
She has no claim to American citizenship.
Sounds like that was the plan.
A truly unbiased government employee. Sure I believe that.
Again!? FR had a similar story earlier today.
So did they actually announce over the loudspeaker, "Excuse me, is there a doctor on the plane?"
As I said on the previous thread, if it was British Airways flight and the woman was a British citizen, no one on this forum would give a damn.
Nope
Nyet
Non
Nein
No way...
Uh-uh
Nah
.
Who gets on a plane to fly somewhere when they're ready to have a child at any moment?
Totally untrue. Crystal clear violation of the 14th Amendment's jurisdiction clause:
"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."
Any citizens of a foreign nation are by fact NOT subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. This is why foreign diplomats in New York don't have their wives giving birth to American citizens. There is no debate about that. So why is there any debate about this or ANY so-called "anchor babies". There is NO SUCH THING. Any baby born to an illegal Mexican alien is a citizen of MEXICO...NOT the U.S.
IF there is such a "provision" in immigration law it is unconstitutional. Any judge ruling otherwise should be impeached. The SCOTUS needs to take this issue up and rule correctly so we can finally have an end to this unlawful law.
Another slick ILLEGAL with an agenda?
"An immigration law provision makes a child born in airspace over U.S. territory eligible for citizenship."
"Anchor Baby"? No. "Chock Baby"
Wow, so many of the people in this thread are willing to criticize this woman without thinking. Let's examine a few facts here.
1) This woman was on an airliner travelling to a US International Airport. This tells us that she had a passport and a visa. How many illegal aliens have passports and visas? Hmmm? You're all so quick to assume that she's an illegal, when there is absolutely NOTHING in the article to indicate that.
2) The fact that she was on an airliner, completing an international flight, also tells us something else...she has money. Mexicans who sneak across the border typically don't have the cash to buy a plane ticket to Chicago, and Mexican's who DO have that kind of money really aren't coming here anyway. It's the Mexican poor who are flooding into the US, not the middle and upper classes of Mexican society who are quite comfortable where they're at.
The only facts we have here are that a Mexican woman gave birth over US airspace and that the child may have claim to US citizenship. There is no indication that the mother actually intends to pursue that citizenship, or that she has any desire to come into the US permanently. For all we know, she may have been coming to see a pediatric specialist (lots of foregners come here for medical attention) or simply to visit a relative who lives in the US.
NOT an anchor baby under the immigration reform act of the 1996 or 94.
They child goes back with the parents when the visa expires. IF (big if) the child has a valid claim to citizenship, it can return when it reaches 18.