Posted on 09/29/2007 6:12:59 AM PDT by Josh Painter
When Fred Thompson said it might be time to review the practice of granting citizenship to every child born on American soil, he didn't acknowledge the seismic shift such an idea represents.
Citizenship by birth has been prescribed by the Constitution since 1868 -- and upheld for 109 years by the Supreme Court -- but the Republican presidential candidate made it sound anachronistic.
"I think that law was created at another time and place for valid reasons," the former U.S. senator from Tennessee said earlier this month. "It probably needs to be revisited."
Thompson's comments have angered Hispanic leaders -- many of them Republicans -- who say they are a crass attempt to court the GOP base.
With conservative voters demanding an end to illegal immigration, Republican candidates have been talking tough on that issue for months. In July, an adviser to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said the Romney campaign was researching the birthright-citizenship issue.
"It's not just ramping up the rhetoric," said Alex Villalobos, a Republican state senator from Miami. "It's pandering to extremists."
State Rep. David Rivera, R-Miami, while not criticizing any candidate directly, called the idea a "xenophobic" notion that could drive Hispanic voters from the GOP.
"At best, this would be seen as mean-spirited," he said. "At worst, it's seen as bigotry."
Thompson made the comments in Cape Coral as he barnstormed through Florida two weeks ago.
He was blasting so-called "chain migration" -- the legal immigration preference that enables naturalized or birthright citizens to bring their non-American family members here -- when he was asked about children born here to illegal immigrants.
Thompson said he was less concerned about them, but that the issue of automatic citizenship should be reviewed.
"It probably needs to be revisited," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at orlandosentinel.com ...
Actually that would be the amendment process, and the will of the people will decide that.
I’m a proud naturalized American Citizen, so called “Hispanic”; I am against illegal immigration and also against this “anchor baby” crap. It has outlived its usefulness, and it has become a danger for the future of our children, and grandchildren.
The Left knows that this issue resonates well with moderate, independent voters and it scares the hell out of them.
State Rep. David Rivera, R-Miami, while not criticizing any candidate directly, called the idea a “xenophobic” notion that could drive Hispanic voters from the GOP.
Yea!we’re really being extremist’s when all we want is to kick these illegal parasite criminals out of our country.They are not American citizens and they have NO rights,except maybe to breath.So they need to be kicked out.
That includes all of the baby droppers that come here and suck off of the Taxpayers dollar.
“The phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” was intended to exclude from automatic citizenship American-born persons whose allegiance to the United States was not complete. In the case of illegal aliens who are temporarily or unlawfully in the United States, because their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child, the completeness of the allegiance to the United States is impaired and logically precludes automatic citizenship.”
Interesting..
Even if they had read the Amendment in question it's highly doubtful that knowledge would be apparent in their reporting. ...which is agenda-based, as you know.
Spot-on and concise explanation of of the 14th, btw.
Why not? The Irish changed their's. We are only one of 33 countries in the world that still has birthright citizenship for anyone born on their soil [save for diplomats] and the only developed country.
ANOTHER great idea from Straight-talking Fred!
Go Fred!
Babies ought to have the citizenship of their mothers (or fathers).
The Constitution (Amendment 14) says 'All persons born or naturalized in the US, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens ...'. Children of diplomats, etc, do not become citizens. Why should the children of those here ILLEGALLY become citizens?
Only children of legal immigrants and preferably an American parent should be citizens. I also won’t object children of two legal immigrant parents to have citizenship. The problem are ILLEGALS.
He’s RIGHT - anchor babies are killing us.
“When Fred Thompson said it ‘might’ be time to review the practice of granting citizenship to every child born on American soil,…”
Hey Fred, “might” is not good enough. Likelihood? Possibility? Not good enough.
Give a straight answer. It is either a “yes” or “no.”
Service guarantees citizenship.
It is unlikely that the Supreme Court will change the interpretation they gave after over 100 years. The constitution could be changed but that takes time. Congress could pass an amendment to the immigration laws this week stating that a person is ineligible for residency as the parent of a U.S. citizen if the parent had been in the U.S. illegally at the time of the petitioning child’s birth. This would effectively end anchor babies and can be done much more easily and quickly.
Hmmm, Thompson finally says something this GOP primary voter likes.
“Thompson’s comments have angered Hispanic leaders — many of them Republicans — who say they are a crass attempt to court the GOP base.”
My take? Let the Hispanic leaders be angry. So what? Who cares? If they do not care about the law (and its intent), why should we care about them. All I can say is, “Bye bye.”
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.