Posted on 05/26/2009 5:27:42 AM PDT by Sinschild
Edited on 05/26/2009 5:30:31 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
U.S. Rep. Nathan Deal, a Republican candidate for governor of Georgia, has proposed changing the long-standing federal policy that automatically grants citizenship to any baby born on U.S. soil, a move opposed by immigrant rights advocates.
Supporters of Deal
(Excerpt) Read more at ajc.com ...
“If someone is here illegally, how can they say they are under the jurisdiction?
The liberals interpret the 14th Amendment in an effort to get more ACORN voters.”
Exactly. When they are caught doing something ELSE illegal, they quickly scream that they are Mexican (or wherever) and say they need legal access to their consulate, etc... So, when having babies - they are “American” - when breaking laws (other than immigration laws - needed to clarify this) - they are citizens of their origin!
It is BS and it is costing Americans greatly! If you don’t believe me, ask the California government! Ha/Ha!!!
Hopefully not with yet another bad ruling.
It is not written into the constitution, several amendments and stupid court decisions have brought us here.
Doesn’t have to be military service. Stick ‘em in the new-model CCC or its equivalent for six years. How good does your eyesight have to be to handle a pick and shovel?
Then shouldn’t the 14th amendment be re-written to correct the misinterpretation?
Nathan Deal is my rep. He started as Democrat back in the ‘80s and switched because the Democrats didn’t do very good job representing his constituents.
He’s a good guy and serious about his job and his country; he’s also in a VERY safe seat.
Assuming that they are able to perform some work ... i.e they are not truely disabled, the individual would then seek out state / local civil service employment.
This could be any number of positions from health inspectors, police, fire, emergency service, jail guards, court clerks, maintenance, or administration.
One point of contention is that I do not consider school districts (at least how they are constituted in Colorado) to be state or local government service. However, an argument could be made to include education in the qualification for service.
I don’t agree with this. It isn’t the child’s fault that the parents are cheating. One may leave many innocent children without an identity.
We’re here to protect the innocent. If we can’t do that, then we might as well submit to Zero.
Bull. Save your "it's for the children" handwringing for someone who is stupid enough to believe it. The children would revert to the nationality of the mother who dropped them JUST LIKE IN OTHER COUNTRIES
I support this 100% — this anchor baby nonsense has to end!
No identity? They have identity as the children of their parents and citizens of their parents’ country. I don’t see how it is violating an infants’ rights to deport his family and him if his parents are illegals.
Exactly.
"Every Person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons." Senator Jacob Howard, co-author of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, 1866.
Actually, I believe this came out of 1986 Immigration Reform Act (Simpson-Mazzoli?), thanks to Sen. Kennedy. The 14th Amendment is explicit in stating that it only applies to people under the jurisdiction of the US, not to visitors.
''In a mature society, 'civil servant' is sematically equivalent to 'civil master'.'' -- Robert A. Heinlein
Typo, sorry. Please read ‘’semantically’’ for ‘’sematically’’.
That worked out really well. Why didn’t he make the
amendment more explicit?
“That worked out really well. Why didn’t he make the
amendment more explicit?”
It was explicit enough for decades until some activist judges decided to change it.
Because they are subject to our laws. If they commit a crime and are caught then they can be tried and jailed. A diplomat with immunity cannot.
" 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
What part of that is unclear to you?
“and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”
I will state again the obvious!
When arrested for crimes (other than illegal immigration) these “temporary workers” claim to be citizens of other countries; therefore, NOT subject to the jurisdiction thereof!
What part of that is unclear to you?
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.