No one is saying this but you.
Because it is a Walker thread, full of Walker apologists.
If citizenship for illegals isn’t amnesty then nothing is amnesty.
I’m saying it. Whatever the Constitution describes with regard to citizenship, it is for situations of persons born to US citizen(s) abroad, or by the Naturalization process.
In the case of the “Naturalization” process, it does not say naturalizing (legalizing) persons who have entered this country illegally, period. That process is one of selection and choice by this government for candidates who have to meet a set of criteria. Criteria which not one illegal alien has met (you know, like background/criminal checks, proof or origin, health status, ability to support themselves, etc.).
What we get are the dregs of the third world with no tangible value added to this country save a vote for Democrats and cheap labor for big corporations.
To twist the intent and implications of the Constitution to fit a platform for a candidate seems to be backwards - badly backwards in my opinion. Further, to force the dilution of my country’s sovereignty by quibbling over the meaning of “amnesty”, “pathways” in the context of desperately trying to keep from saying the words “no citizenship - ever” is a deal breaker in my opinion.
Just once, I’d like to see an argument for “amnesty” or “pathway” or whatever it’s called today without using the obfuscating word “immigration”.