Uh, Janet, you dumbass, the Constitution outlines the process for amending the Constitution.
Since the founding fathers anticipated the possible need for changes they put that in.
You may not agree with the talk, but it's not wrong.
Article 5 - Amendment
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
How can these people, charged with the responsibility of administering the fed government, possibly function without an understanding of the document that allows them to exist as functionaries?
I want all government functionaries to pass a test before they can be sworn in and allowed to serve.
Most probably it was the Southern Democrats in the civil war era who were against citizenship for the children of freed slaves.
Most probably it was the Southern Democrats in the civil war era who were against citizenship for the children of freed slaves.
“natural born children of illegal ...”
That is the whole point, natural born MEANS a child born of US citizens, whether on US soil or otherwise authorized (Foreign servie/Mil duty and a few obsure others).
The children of illegals are NOT US citizens in the natural born sense and should not be US citizens at all.
Yes, I am a meany.
Immigration reform is a good idea. I'm all in favor of reforming immigration.
which would include a pathway to citizenship for the country’s illegal immigrants.
Why? Why is that necessary? There's plenty of ways to change both the immigration laws and how they are enforced in a positive fashion without doing that.
So, why are you talking about it, Janet??
How about both of these stupid asshats just go away. Gibbs criticizes republicans as, “strict constructionists talking about tinkering with the Constitution.” That’s the way it was originally intended to be changed - not by activist judges finding “emanations and penumbras” that only exist in their addled little minds.
A child of illegal immigrants can NOT NOT NOT be a natural born citizen.
This author, I believe, is deliberately confusing, in an Orwellian manner, the meaning of natural born and native born.
“...because we would just ignore it anyway.”
First of all, the 14th amendment was written so children of newly freed slaves (Slaves were not initially citezens)and native American Indians (who were legaly considered an independednt nation of people) would be granted full citezenship rights inspite of the ‘quazi’ citezenship of their parents at the time. No reasonable person then or now would be against the purpose of that amendment. The idea of giving citezenship to an illegal immigrants baby is just manifestly crazy, though.